Agenda packet — Madera City Council, August 5, 2026 (part 2 of 2)

October 3, 2024
R. Damon Brandley, P.E.

Brandley Engineering, Inc.
6125 King Road Suite 201
Loomis, CA 95650
RE: Aerial Photography and Surveying Services at Madera Municipal Airport (Madera, CA) - MAE Dear Damon,
Thank you for the opportunity to provide you with our proposal for Geospatial Services at Madera Municipal Airport. Herewith is our SOW for your review. If there is anything you would like to discuss further on this project please do not hesitate to reach out.

Thank you again, and we look forward to working with you on this project.

Sincerely,
Woolpert, Inc.

Justin Ness, PLS
Aviation Geospatial/Survey/AGIS Practice Manger
Senior Associate
Enclosure: Scope of Work dated October 3, 2024
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 2 of 13 ends

SCOPEOF WORK
FOR
Madera Municipal Airport (MAE)
Madera, California
Aeronautical Survey to Support AGIS Obstruction, ALP Updating Woolpert will complete an aeronautical survey and airspace analysis to support the development of an Airport Layout Plan. This survey will follow the standards for an aeronautical survey and submission to the FAA Airports GIS (AGIS) through the FAAs Airport Data and Information Portal (ADIP) as outlined in the following guidance:
 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-16B, General Guidance and Specifications for Aeronautical Surveys: Establishment of Geodetic Control and Submission to the National Geodetic Survey.  FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-17C, Standards for Using Remote Sensing Technologies in Airport Surveys.
 FAA Advisory Circular 150/5300-18B, General Guidance and Specifications for Submission of Aeronautical Surveys to NGS: Field Data Collection and Geographic Information System (GIS) Standards.

This project will consist of completing an aeronautical survey and data collection project following the Airport Layout Plan Column from Table 2-1 of the FAA AC -18B, a Vertically Guided Runway airspace analysis for all existing runways, as well as FAR Part 77 approach and departure surface analysis for each runway. In addition, Woolpert will analyze the PAPI OCS/LSCS Surfaces for each appropriate runway, truncated to the extents of the VG surface area.

The specific task and task details are as follows:

1.0 Aeronautical Survey Data Collection and Obstruction analysis for AC 150/5300-18B, Vertically Guided Approach Obstruction Identification Surfaces
Woolpert will collect and submit the necessary data for an airspace analysis based on existing airfield conditions. All necessary existing data will be submitted through the Airport Data and Information Portal (ADIP) as required by the aforementioned Advisory Circulars (AC). The following items will be performed as a part of this survey:
 Initiate and complete an AGIS Project within the Airport Data and Information Portal (ADIP).

A Safety-Critical Data Collection, Not Including Design Data survey project will be created. o Develop and submit the Project SOW
o Develop and submit an Imagery Plan
o Develop and submit a Survey and Quality Control Plan
 Prepare Airport Manager/Operator interviews
 Establish or validate airport Geodetic Control. It is assumed that the existing PACS and SACS at the airfield are in good condition and can be verified. If it is determined the PACS and SACS are lost and/or disturbed, Temporary Survey Marks (TSMs) will be established in accordance with -16B and utilized as the basis of control for this project.

EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 3 of 13 ends

o Perform, document, and report the tie to National Spatial Reference System (NSRS) o Document control featuresrequiring digital photographs o Document control featuresrequiring sketches
 Establish photogrammetric control and collect stereo imagery covering the surface area defined by the -18B Vertically guided (VG) surfaces, FAR Part 77 approach and departure surfaces, and the PAPI OCS/LSCS surfaces, as shown in Exhibit No. 1. o Estimated 18 control points and 5 check points.
o Collect imagery with a 6” ground sample distance (GSD), flight layout will be provided.
o Collected with leaf-on conditions.
 Geo-referencing of aerial photography
 Perform or validate and document an airport airspace analysis based on existing airfield conditions for objects penetrating the Vertically Guided surfaces. o Woolpert will request existing obstacle data from the FAA for review of the OIS. As a value-added service, Woolpert will validate and update existing obstacles within 5nm of the Runway as necessary to reduce the number of duplicated obstacles within the FAA obstacle database.
o Woolpert will collect objects penetrating the OIS using the Object Density Selection Criteria (ODSC) as specified in Section 2.7.1.6 of FAA AC 150/5300-18B.  Field verify a sampling of critical existing obstacle data currently in the FAA Obstacle Authoratative Source
 Survey, monument, and document runway critical points (ends, thresholds, blast pads, stopways)
o Determine runway length and width, existing elements
o Determine runway profile on all runways using 50-foot stations, existing elements (10-foot stations and 10-foot offset left and right for all Part 139 airports) o Determine the touchdown zone elevation, existing elements o Determine the runway true azimuth, existing and future element o Document runway critical features requiring digital photographs o Document runway critical features requiring sketches
 Determine or validate and document the position of navigational aids (NAVAID) and runway abeam points, existing elements.
o Document NAVAID features requiring digital photographs o Document NAVAID critical features requiring sketches
 Collect major landmark features within imagery coverage.  Populate calculable and required attributes.
 Develop an AGIS-compliant data file containing the safety critical data required to achieve instrument approach procedure development.
 Prepare a 6” pixel resolution ortho-rectified aerial photo from collected imagery covering the full extent of the OIS or covering the extent identified in Exhibit No. 3  Develop and submit a final project report
 Develop and submit an imagery acquisition report
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 4 of 13 ends

2.0 Planimetric Mapping, Contours and Ortho-Rectified Aerial Photo Woolpert will Complete 1”=100’scale airport planimetric mapping and 2-foot contourinterval DEM ofthe area shown in Exhibit No. 2.
 Mapping will include features required for standard Airport Layout Plan (ALP) base mapping, as shown in Exhibit No. 4.
 Airport planimetric mapping will be delivered in AutoCAD format

3.0 Obstruction Analysis for Part 77, AC-13B Approach Surfaces and PAPI OCS/LSCS.

Woolpert will complete additional analysis covering the FAR Part 77 and AC-150/5300-13B surfaces Approach Surfaces, and PAPI OCS/LSCS surfaces for each runway, as applicable. The following surfaces will be analyzed for obstacles using the imagery collected as part of task item 1.0. The analysis will be compiled and delivered in AutoCAD format and incorporated into the ALP. Groups of trees or heavily wooded areas that are obstructions will be represented with polyline boundaries depicting the extent of the surface penetration.
 Woolpert will collect objects penetrating these surfaces using the Object Density Selection Criteria (ODSC) as specified in Section 2.7.1.6 of FAA AC 150/5300-18B.  Representative tree top elevations will also be reported within each area.

Obstacle analysis will be completed to show potential obstacles that penetrate the approach surfaces to account for future vegetation growth.

Woolpert will develop and deliver a Microsoft Excel file containing information to all Obstacles that were collected that penetrate the Obstruction Identification Surfaces  This spreadsheet will contain Northing, Easting, Elevation, Penetration  Depth, Station, and Offset information
Runway 12 - Existing
 Part 77 Non-Precision Type C (34:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 5 Approach Surface (20:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 5 Approach Surface (34:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 6 Approach Surface (30:1)
 VGSI OCS/LSCS-PAPI (2-box) analysis will be truncated to the extent of the 18B Vertically Guided Surface/Imagery Limits, effectively 4 miles.

Runway 30 - Existing
 Part 77 Non-Precision Type C (34:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 5 Approach Surface (20:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 5 Approach Surface (34:1)
 FAA AC-150/5300-13B Type 6 Approach Surface (30:1)
 VGSI OCS/LSCS-PAPI (2-box) analysis will be truncated to the extent of the 18B Vertically Guided Surface/Imagery Limits, effectively 4 miles.

Areas of terrain that penetrate the specified OIS surface shall be contoured at 2-foot intervals.

EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 5 of 13 ends

Spot elevations will be provided on a 200’ grid inside the specified Part 77 approach surface  This grid will not be provided in obscured areas
 Areas of ground penetration will be captured at a 100 foot grid interval  The outline of the limits of the ground penetrating the OIS surface is to be identified All railroad and road centerlines will have a spot elevation where they cross the extended runway centerline and the exterior limits of the OIS surfaces.

The Part 77 Imaginary Surfaces shallshow 50 foot interval contours which are labeled.

Delivery Schedule
Woolpert will deliver the final deliverables for this project no later than 180 calendar days from the date of a notice to proceed or the ability to acquire leaf-on imagery, if NTP is issued during leaf-off season. It is assumed that the notice to proceed is received in a timely manner to facility collection of imagery during leaf-on conditions. A formal project delivery schedule will be compiled based on project needs and negotiated prior to starting this project.

Fee Breakdown
The fee breakdown shown in the following table is based on Lump Sum progress billing. These fees are valid for acquisition in 2026. If this project is delayed beyond 2026, additional fees may be required to cover escalation of costs.

Fee Breakdown – Lump Sum
Task Description Fee

1.0 – Aeronautical Survey and AGIS Data Submittal $62,275

2.0 – Planimetric Mapping, Contours, Ortho-Photo $26,357

3.0 – Part 77/AC-13B/PAPI OCS and LSCS Analysis $11,250 Lump Sum Fee Total $99,882
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 6 of 13 ends

Exhibit No. 1
Surface Analysis AOI and ALP Mapping Imagery Limits
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 7 of 13 ends

Exhibit No. 2
Planimetric Mapping Limits
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 8 of 13 ends

Exhibit No. 3
6” Ortho Limits
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 9 of 13 ends

Exhibit No. 4
Table 2-1 Survey Requirements Matrix from AC 150/5300-18B Intended End Use of the Data AC Reference Airport
Layout
Plan (ALP)
Instrument
Procedure
Development
Comments
Required Tasks V
Provide a Survey and Quality Control Plan 150/5300-16/17/18 • • Establish or validate Airport Geodetic Control 150/5300-16 • • Perform, document and report the tie to National Spatial Reference System (NSRS)
150/5300-16 • •
Survey runway end(s)/threshold(s) 150/5300-18 • •
Monument runway end(s)/threshold(s) 150/5300-18 • •
Document runway end(s)/threshold location(s) 150/5300-18 • •1 Identify and survey any displaced threshold(s) 150/5300-18 • • Monument displaced threshold(s) 150/5300-18 •1 •
Document displaced threshold(s) location 150/5300-18 • • Determine or validate runway length 150/5300-18 • •
Determine or validate runway width 150/5300-18 • •
Determine runway profile using 50 foot stations 150/5300-18 •2 • Determine runway profile using 10 foot stations 150/5300-18 •2 • Determine the touchdown zone elevation (TDZE) 150/5300-18 • • Determine and document the intersection point of all specially prepared hard surface (SPHS) runways
150/5300-18 •
Determine and document the horizontal extents of any
Stopways
150/5300-18 • •
Determine any Stopway profiles 150/5300-18 • •
Determine if the runway has an associated clearway 150/5300-18 • Survey clearway to determine objects penetrating the slope 150/5300-18 • • Determine and document the taxiway intersection to threshold distance
150/5300-18 •
Determine runway true azimuth 150/5300-18 • •
Determine or validate and document the position of
navigational aids
150/5300-18 • •
Determine or validate and document the position of runway abeam points of navigational aids
150/5300-18 •
Determine potential navigational aid screening objects 150/5300-18 Collect and document VOR receiver checkpoint location and associated data
150/5300-18
Perform or validate and document an airport airspace analysis 150/5300-18 • • Collect and document helicopter touchdown lift off area (TLOF)
150/5300-18 • •
Collect and document helicopter final approach and takeoff area (FATO)
150/5300-18 • •
Collect or validate and document airport planimetric data 150/5300-18 • Determine or validate the elevation of the Air Traffic Control Tower Cab Floor (if one is on the airport)
150/5300-18 •
Perform or validate a topographic survey 150/5300-18 • •4 Collect and document runway and taxiway lighting 150/5300-18 • EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 10 of 13 ends

Collect and document parking stand coordinates 150/5300-18 Collect cultural and natural features of landmark value 150/5300-18 • Determine elevation of roadways at the intersecting point of the Runway Protection Zone (RPZ) or the runway centerline extended
150/5300-18 •
Determine all Land Use to 65 DNL contour 150/5300-18 • Not provided by Woolpert
Document featuresrequiring digital photographs 150/5300-18 • • Document featuresrequiring sketches 150/5300-18 • •
Collect position and type of runway markings 150/5300-18 • Collect position and type taxiway markings 150/5300-18
Locate, collect, and document photo ID points 150/5300-17 Identify collect, and document wetlands or environmentally sensitive areas
150/5300-18 • Not provided by
Woolpert
Collect imagery 150/5300-17 • •
Provide a final Project Report 150/5300-16/18 • •
1 Only when runway construction isinvolved.
2 All 14 CFR Part 139 airports require 10 foot stations. At all other airports the distance between stations is between 10 and 50 feet to meet local requirements
3 Only required for the identified Category II and IIIspecial topographic survey³³
4 For Cat II and III radar altimeter area or if specifically requested
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 11 of 13 ends

Exhibit No. 5
AC 150/5300-18B Required Feature Collection Table (when applicable) Safety Critical
Ac 150/5300-
18b Section
Number
Features
On Airport
Off Airport

5.4. Airfield

5.4.10. RunwayIntersection X

5.4.11. RunwayLAHSO X

5.4.12. RunwayElement X

5.4.18. TouchDownLiftOff X

5.4.19. MarkingArea (Runway only) X

5.4.20. MarkingLine (Runway only) X

5.4.22. Runway X

5.4.25. RunwayBlastPad X

5.4.26. RunwayEnd X

5.4.27. RunwayLabel X

5.4.28. Runway Safety Area Boundary (Existing) X

5.4.8. RunwayCenterline X

5.4.9. RunwayHelipadDesignSurfaces (Existing) X X

5.5. Airspace

5.5.2. Obstacle X X

5.5.3. ObstructionArea X X

5.5.4. ObstructionIDSurface X X

5.8. Geospatial

5.8. AirportControlPoints X X

5.8.9. CoordinateGridArea X X

5.10. Navigational Aids

5.10. Navaidequipment X X
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 12 of 13 ends

Non-Safety Critical
Ac 150/5300-
18b Section
Number
Features
On Airport
Off Airport

5.4. Airfield

5.4.1. AircraftGateStand X

5.4.14. Taxiwayholdingposition X

5.4.15. AirportSign X

5.4.16. Apron X

5.4.17. Deicing Area (Existing) X

5.4.19. MarkingArea (Off Runway) X

5.4.2. AircraftNonMovementArea X

5.4.20. MarkingLine (Off Runway) X

5.4.21. MovementArea X

5.4.24. RunwayArrestingArea X

5.4.29. Shoulder X

5.4.30. TaxiwayIntersection X

5.4.31. TaxiwayElement X

5.4.4. AirfieldLight X

5.4.5. ArrestingGear X

5.4.7. PassengerLoadingBridge X

5.5. Airspace

5.5.1. LandmarkSegment X X

5.5.5. RunwayProtectArea (Existing) X

5.7. Environmental

5.7.11. Shoreline X X

5.7.12. Wetland (no official delineation) X

5.7.3. Flood Zone X X

5.7.5. Forest Stand Area X X

5.7.7. Noise Contour X X

5.8. Geospatial

5.8.10. ElevationContour X X

5.8.11. ImageArea X X

5.9. Man Made Structures

5.9.1. Building X X

5.9.4. Fence X
EXHIBIT A - ATTACHMENT 1

Page 13 of 13 ends

5.9.5. Gate X

5.9.6. Tower X X

5.13. Surface Transportation

5.13.1. Bridge X X

5.13.2. DrivewayArea X

5.13.3. DrivewayCenterline X

5.13.4. ParkingLot X X

5.13.5. RailroadCenterline X X

5.13.6. RailroadYard X X

5.13.7. RoadCenterline X X

5.13.8. RoadPoint X X

5.13.9. RoadSegment X X

5.14. Utilities

5.14.1. TankSite X
Madera Muni, Madera, CA
Task Description Project
Manager
Senior
IFP/Aero
Engineer
Project
Engineer
(QA)
Subtotal
Hours
Travel
Cost Subtotal Cost Subtotal Task
Hourly Rate $225 $165 $100
Task One - Meetings & Coordination $5,910.00
Scoping / Kickoff Meeting 2 1 0 3 $615.00
Meeting with MAE Stakeholders to gather requirements 2 2 0 4 $780.00 B.E. Progress Updates (e-mail or telephone) 8 4 0 12 $2,460.00 Airport Current Conditions Coordination 2 0 0 2 $450.00 ATO/ATC Coordination 1 2 2 5 $755.00
Administrative Support 2 0 4 6 $850.00
Task Two - RWY 12 Approach Assessment $8,045.00
IFP Workspace Setup (Aeronautical Data) 1 2 2 5 $755.00 Review existing instrument procedures for current
criteria limitations and identify impacts from new AGIS Obstacle survey.
1 4 2 7 $1,085.00
Process & Deconflict new Obstacle Survey Data 1 3 2 $920.00 Assess obstacle & infrastructure compatibility for an
LPV/ILS approach with 200' HAT & 3/4SM
Improvements (Analysis limited to final & missed
approach segments)
6 8 3 17 $2,970.00
Assess Lighting / ALS Improvements 3 2 1 6 $1,105.00
Document Findings 2 4 1 7 $1,210.00
0 $0.00
Task Three - RWY 30 Approach Assessment $8,045.00
IFP Workspace Setup (Aeronautical Data) 1 2 2 5 $755.00 Review existing instrument procedures for current
criteria limitations and identify impacts from new AGIS Obstacle survey.
1 4 2 7 $1,085.00
Process & Deconflict new Obstacle Survey Data 1 3 2 $920.00 Assess obstacle & infrastructure compatibility for an
LPV/ILS approach with 200' HAT & 3/4SM
Improvements (Analysis limited to final & missed
approach segments)
6 8 3 17 $2,970.00
Assess Lighting / ALS Improvements 3 2 1 6 $1,105.00
Document Findings 2 4 1 7 $1,210.00
0 $0.00
Task Four - Final Report $8,200.00
TERPS Procedure Feasibility Report Development 16 16 4 36 $6,640.00 Virtual MAE Report Presentation (no travel) 4 4 8 $1,560.00 0 0
Subtotals 0 65 75 32 160 $0 Grand Total $30,200.00
$0 $14,625 $12,375 $3,200
Exhibit A - Attachment 2
Flight Tech Scope of Work
Feasibility Study - Visability Reduction

EXHIBIT B

MADERA MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

MADERA, CALIFORNIA

BREAKDOWN OF ENGINEERING FEES
Airport Layout Plan Narrative with Updated ALP Drawings and AGIS Survey Airport Planning and Environmental
Services Contract – Task Order No. 1
Exhibit B – Page B-1
Project Scoping/Pre-Planning
Principal Engineer 10.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 3,000.00
Senior Engineer 7.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 1,260.00
Project Administrator 4.0 Hrs. @ 100.00 400.00
Mileage 300.0 Hrs. @ 0.58 174.00
Total Project Scoping $ 4,834.00
Use $ 5,000.00
DBE Goal Calculation
DBE Specialist Subconsultant $ 6,000.00
Principal Engineer 2.0 Hrs. @ 300.00 600.00
Total - DBE Goal Calculation $ 6,600.00
Use 6,600.00
Inventory
Principal Engineer 12.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 3,600.00
Senior Engineer 5.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 900.00
Project Administrator 10.0 Hrs. @ 100.00 1,000.00
Total Inventory $ 5,500.00
Use 6,000.00
Aviation Forecast/Critical Aircraft
Principal Engineer 25.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 7,500.00
Junior Engineer 5.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 900.00
Total Aviation Forecast/Critical Aircraft $ 8,400.00
Use 9,000.00
Environmental & Wildlife Hazard Management
Environmental Subconsultant $ 8,000.00
Subconsultant Markup - 10%
Total Environmental
800.00
8,800.00
Airport Geospatial Information System (AGIS) and Obstruction Mitigation Plan Aeronautical Survey and AGIS Data Submittal Not to Exceed $ 62,275.00 Planimetric Mapping, Contours, Ortho-Photo Not to Exceed 26,357.00 Part 77/AC-13B/PAPI OCS & LSCS Analysis Not to Exceed 11,250.00 Subconsultant Markup - 10% 9,988.20
Principal Engineer 35.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 10,500.00
Junior Engineer 50.0 Hrs. @ 120.00 6,000.00
Project Administrator 12.0 Hrs. @ 100.00 1,200.00
Total AGIS & Obstruction Mitigation $ 127,570.20
Use 128,000.00

EXHIBIT B

MADERA MUNICIPAL AIRPORT

MADERA, CALIFORNIA

BREAKDOWN OF ENGINEERING FEES
Airport Layout Plan Narrative with Updated ALP Drawings and AGIS Survey Airport Planning and Environmental
Services Contract – Task Order No. 1
Exhibit B – Page B-2
Alternatives Development and Evaluation
Principal Engineer 25.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 7,500.00
Senior Engineer 10.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 1,800.00
Flight Procedures Subconsultant 30,200.00
Subconsultant Markup - 10% 3,020.00
Total Alternatives $ 42,520.00
Use $ 43,000.00
ALP Updated Plans including Exhibit "A"
Principal Engineer 100.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 30,000.00
Senior Engineer 250.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 45,000.00
Senior Drafter 100.0 Hrs. @ 120.00 12,000.00
Clerical 30.0 Hrs. @ 85.00 2,550.00
Total ALP Updated Plans $ 89,550.00
Use 90,000.00
Development Summary
Principal Engineer 25.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 7,500.00
Senior Engineer 20.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 3,600.00
Junior Engineer 16.0 Hrs. @ 120.00 1,920.00
Total Development Summary $ 13,020.00
Use 13,000.00
Narrative Report
Principal Engineer 30.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 9,000.00
Project Administrator 15.0 Hrs. @ 100.00 1,500.00
Clerical 10.0 Hrs. @ 85.00 850.00
Total Narrative Report $ 11,350.00
Use 12,000.00
FAA/City Coordination
Principal Engineer 30.0 Hrs. @ $ 300.00 $ 9,000.00
Senior Engineer 10.0 Hrs. @ 180.00 1,800.00
Senior Drafter 10.0 Hrs. @ 120.00 1,200.00
Project Administrator 10.0 Hrs. @ 100.00 1,000.00
Clerical 4.0 Hrs. @ 85.00 340.00
Total FAA Coordination $ 13,340.00
Use 14,000.00
Total Engineering Fees $ 348,400.00

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by: Council Meeting of: August 5, 2026
_________________________________ Agenda Number: ___________ Michael Lima, Director of Financial Services
_________________________________
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report
RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the Recommendations Presented in the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report
SUMMARY:

City staff has been working with Flexlynqs, LLC (Flexlynqs) to prepare a Microtransit Feasibility Study. The purpose of the study was to determine the feasibility of incorporating micro-transit into the City’s public transit system. Staff from the City and Flexlynqs presented their recommendations at the Council’s May 20, 2026 meeting. If adopted, these recommendations are anticipated to transition the City’s public transit system to primarily a micro-transit model.

Should Council approve these recommendations as part of this item, staff anticipates that it will be June 2028 before the recommendations are implemented.

DISCUSSION:

The City has provided a public transit system for several years. This system has been modified over time to account for additional population, changing destination preferences, and new modal technologies. The most recent change to the transit system occurred in January 2024 with the implementation of two new fixed routes to supplement the two other fixed routes already being provided. However, since that last change, City staff has noted the number of passengers riding the system’s fixed route service has stagnated and even declined at times, despite the service being free to passengers. Offsetting this decrease was an increase in the Dial-A-Ride and ADA ridership. Given the passenger growth in the on-demand segment of the City’s transit system, D-6
Return to Agenda
City staff concluded it would be prudent to recommend the commissioning of a feasibility study involving the incorporation of micro-transit into the City’s transit system.

After an RFP process, Council approved a contract with Flexlynqs on June 18, 2025 for the preparation of a Microtransit Feasibility Study. In the year that followed, City staff worked closely with Flexlynqs staff to develop the analysis and recommendations in the feasibility study. The combination of data analytics and stakeholder feedback shaped the report’s recommendations.

Flexlynqs held several information gathering sessions with stakeholders such as current transit system riders, community college students, Transit Advisory Board members, and Councilmembers. The following community workshops were held:
 September 22 and 23, 2025 (individual meetings with Council members)  February 19, 2026 (Madera Community College students, faculty, staff)  March 3, 2026 (Public workshop at City of Madera Council Chambers)  May 11, 2026 (Transit Advisory Board)
A status report on the Microtransit Feasibility Study was presented to Council at its February 12, 2026 meeting. The Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report (Final Report) with recommendations was presented to Council at its May 20, 2026 meeting.

Recommended Changes
In short, the Final Report concluded that moving the City’s transit system to a hybrid fixed route/micro-transit system would likely increase ridership, result in better utilization of transit vehicles, and slightly reduce costs when compared to the current model. The recommendations included:
 Elimination of two fixed routes (Green and Blue routes).  Reconfiguration of remaining two fixed routes (Purple and Orange routes).  Increasing the frequency on the Orange route from 1 hour to 30 minutes.  Implementing microtransit to serve the community outside of the two fixed routes. The microtransit service area would roughly be the same as the existing Dial-A-Ride service area.
 Extended service hours for microtransit on Saturdays when compared to the hours currently offered through Dial-A-Ride.
 Utilizing on-demand mobility services to cover service times not covered by the City’s transit system.
 Setting up a pilot “Fresno Connector” program to connect Madera residents to Fresno’s transit system for medical and personal appointments.

At the May 20th meeting, staff recommended that Council take the report’s recommendations under advisement, with the goal of returning to Council at a later date for consideration and possible adoption.

Implementation of new system
It should be noted that should Council approve the recommendations in the feasibility study, nothing will immediately change with the Madera Metro system. Instead, Council’s approval of the report’s recommendations will allow City staff to begin the process of implementing the recommendations. Among the items to be addressed before the micro-transit system is ready for customers are:
 Development of a Request for Proposal (RF) for a transit system operator  Award of a contract to a transit system operator (requires Council action).  Development/implementation of a fare policy for the micro-transit system (requires Council action).
 Refinement of the micro-transit system configuration (requires Council action).  Creation and implementation of a marketing plan to inform Madera residents of the new micro-transit focus for the Madera transit system.

Driving the overall implementation is the expiration of the current transit operator contract. This contract’s base term ends on June 30, 2027, with a one-year extension ending June 30, 2028.

Staff believes that the steps needed for implementation of the microtransit system can be completed by the end date of the one-year extension on the existing transit operator contract.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

There will be no immediate financial impact to the Transit funds with the adoption of the Final Report’s recommendations. Should the recommendations be adopted, there will almost certainly be a financial impact to the Transit funds from the system’s implementation. In the Final Report, Flexlynqs estimated approximately $71,000 in savings from current operating costs once the microtransit system was fully operational. This savings is anticipated to be generated through a reduction in fixed route service from current levels. However, actual savings (if any) will not be known until the system incurs operating costs.

It should be noted that transit expenses and personnel time are paid for by Federal Transit Authority, State of California, and local annual allocations of State of Good Repair, Low Carbon Transit Operations Program, Local Transportation Fund, and Measure T monies.

ALTERNATIVES:

1. Reject the Final Report.

2. Provide suggestion to incorporate in the Final Report.

3. Direct staff to continue working with Flexlynqs in developing the Final Report.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Resolution authorizing the acceptance of the Final Report attached as Exhibit A to the resolution.

RESOLUTION NO. 26 - ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL, OF THE CITY OF MADERA,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE MADERA MICROTRANSIT FEASIBILITY

STUDY FINAL REPORT
WHEREAS, City entered into an Agreement with Flexlynqs LLC for professional consultation services effective June 18, 2025, for a twelve-month period ending on June 30, 2026.

WHEREAS, Flexlynqs staff and City staff developed the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report; and
WHEREAS, City staff has determined that the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report is reasonable and includes practical implantation strategies; and WHEREAS, City staff presented the findings and recommendations of the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report to Council on May 20, 2026, and WHEREAS, City staff is requesting Council approval of the Final Report and the recommendation contained therein.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Madera finds, determines, resolves and orders as follows:

1. The Recitals listed above are true and correct.

2. The Council accepts the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report, which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference as Exhibit A.

3. The Council approves the recommendations contained within the Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Final Report.

4. This Resolution is effective immediately upon adoption. *****
MADERA METRO TRANSIT May 2026

MICROTRANSIT

FEASIBILITY STUDY

FINAL REPORT
Exhibit A
Microtransit Feasibility Study
Final Report
Prepared for
City of Madera
Madera Metro
205 W. 4th Street
Madera, CA 93637
Prepared by
Flexlynqs LLC
39899 Balentine Drive, Suite 200
Newark, CA 94560
In partnership with
Ontra Mobility
Bodewell Group
May 2026

[This page intentionally left blank]
Table of Contents
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY........................................................................................................................1 CURRENT SYSTEM CHALLENGES ........................................................................................................................1 PROPOSED SOLUTION ......................................................................................................................................5 SUMMARY AND PROJECTED IMPACTS .................................................................................................................12 A WAY FORWARD..........................................................................................................................................14 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................15 2 EXISTING CONDITIONS .............................................................................................................16

2.1 DEMOGRAPHICS ...............................................................................................................................16

2.2 TRAVEL PATTERNS .............................................................................................................................18

2.3 TRANSIT SERVICES AND POLICIES .........................................................................................................20

2.3.1 Madera Metro Fixed-Route............................................................................................21

2.3.2 Route Design Characteristics ........................................................................................23

2.3.3 Dial-A-Ride & ADA/Paratransit.......................................................................................30

2.3.4 Technology .................................................................................................................34

2.4 VEHICLE FLEET .................................................................................................................................35

2.4.1 Regional Transit Services ..............................................................................................35 3 COMMUNITY FEEDBACK ...........................................................................................................37

3.1 PHASE 1 OUTREACH..........................................................................................................................37

3.1.1 Quantitative Results.....................................................................................................37

3.1.2 Qualitative Feedback ...................................................................................................41

3.2 PHASE 2 OUTREACH..........................................................................................................................42

3.2.1 Quantitative Results.....................................................................................................42

3.3 SUMMARY OF PHASE 2 QUALITATIVE FEEDBACK .......................................................................................49 Several Themes Emerged ............................................................................................................49 4 BEST PRACTICES.......................................................................................................................51

4.1 SERVICE DESIGN...............................................................................................................................51

4.2 TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATIONS ..........................................................................................................52

4.3 EQUITY AND ACCESSIBILITY .................................................................................................................52

4.4 PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENT AND ADAPTATION ....................................................................................53

4.5 KEY TAKEAWAYS................................................................................................................................53 5 SERVICE DESIGN ALTERNATIVES ...............................................................................................54

5.1 METHODOLOGY ................................................................................................................................54

5.1.1 Concept Generation and Initial Screening.......................................................................54

5.1.2 Developing a Demand Model ........................................................................................55

5.1.3 Scenario Testing ..........................................................................................................55

5.2 INITIAL ALTERNATIVES.........................................................................................................................56

5.2.1 Baseline .....................................................................................................................56

5.2.2 Modified Fixed-Routes with On-Demand: Maximum Cost Efficiency (Option A) ...................57

5.2.3 Modified Fixed-Route with On-Demand: Maximum Ridership (Option B).............................59 Table of Contents

5.2.4 On-Demand Microtransit Only (Option C) .......................................................................60

5.2.5 Additional Options.......................................................................................................62 6 EVALUATION AND RECOMMENDATIONS.....................................................................................66

6.1 RECOMMENDED APPROACH................................................................................................................66

6.2 SUMMARY AND PROJECTED IMPACTS .....................................................................................................73

6.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction and Cost Effectiveness ........................................75 7 A WAY FORWARD ......................................................................................................................77

7.1 FUNDING STRATEGIES ........................................................................................................................77

7.1.1 Use Existing Transit Funds as the Foundation ..................................................................77

7.1.2 Leverage Air Quality Funding (High Priority) .....................................................................78

7.1.3 Position Microtransit as an Equity Investment .................................................................78

7.1.4 Coordinate with Regional Partners.................................................................................78

7.1.5 Start with a Pilot Program..............................................................................................79

7.1.6 Combine Public Funding with Local and Institutional Support ...........................................79

7.1.7 Align the Project with Specific Use Cases .......................................................................79

7.1.8 Plan for Long-Term Sustainability ...................................................................................80

7.1.9 Key Takeaways ............................................................................................................80

7.2 OVERVIEW OF FUNDING PROGRAMS .....................................................................................................80

7.2.1 Federal Programs...........................................................................................................80

7.2.2 State Programs ..............................................................................................................81

7.2.3 Regional/Local ............................................................................................................81

7.3 PHASED IMPLEMENTATION...................................................................................................................81

7.3.1 Phase 1: Transition to On-Demand Microtransit...............................................................81

7.3.2 Phase 2: Fixed-Route Refinement and Public Communication ..........................................82

7.3.3 Phase 3: Fixed-Route Service Implementation ................................................................82

7.3.4 Ongoing Monitoring and Adjustment ..............................................................................85

7.4 KPI FRAMEWORK ..............................................................................................................................85 8 MARKETING, BRANDING, AND COMMUNICATIONS STRATEGY ....................................................88

8.1 GUIDING PRINCIPLES.........................................................................................................................88

8.2 BRANDING STRATEGY.........................................................................................................................89

8.2.1 Microtransit Service Identity..........................................................................................89

8.2.2 Vehicle Design and Visual Identity .................................................................................89

8.2.3 System Branding Integration .........................................................................................89

8.3 MARKETING STRATEGY........................................................................................................................90

8.3.1 Traditional Media .........................................................................................................90

8.3.2 Social Media ...............................................................................................................90

8.3.3 Word-of-Mouth and Ambassador Programs ....................................................................90

8.3.4 Incentive-Based Adoption.............................................................................................91

8.3.5 Targeted Outreach and Community Partnerships.............................................................91

8.4 COMMUNICATION MATERIALS ..............................................................................................................92 APPENDIX A. EXISTING CONDITIONS ................................................................................................94 APPENDIX B. INDUSTRY SCAN ..........................................................................................................95 Table of Contents
APPENDIX C. OUTREACH SUMMARY REPORT ....................................................................................96 Table of Tables
Table ES-1. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Services ............................................................. 8 Table ES-2. Proposed Changes to Dial-A-Ride Services .............................................................. 9 Table ES-3. Summary of Proposed Changes and Projected Impact........................................... 12 Table ES-4. Cost Summary by Route / Service ........................................................................... 13 Table 2-1. Population Trends by Age Group: Absolute and Percentage Change (The City of Madera)......................................................................................................................................... 17 Table 2-2. Salient Aspects per Route ........................................................................................... 22 Table 3-1. Overall Sentiment ........................................................................................................ 38 Table 3-2. Reasons for Not Using Transit..................................................................................... 38 Table 3-3. Desired Transit Improvements (Top Responses)........................................................ 39 Table 3-4. Student Preferences and Perceptions ........................................................................ 40 Table 3-5. Student-Identified Improvements ................................................................................ 40 Table 3-6. Interest in Using On-Demand Microtransit .................................................................. 43 Table 3-7. Expected Frequency of Use ........................................................................................ 44 Table 3-8. Maximum Acceptable Wait Time for Pickup ................................................................ 44 Table 3-9. Fare That Would Feel Like a Good Value ................................................................... 45 Table 3-10. Interest in Using Microtransit Outside Current Operating Hours .............................. 45 Table 3-11. Comfort with Microtransit as the Only Transit Option................................................ 46 Table 3-12. Features of Fixed-Routes That Continue to Matter................................................... 46 Table 3-13. If Fixed-Routes Were Changed, What Would Matter Most....................................... 46 Table 3-14. Interest in On-Demand Service to Fresno for Medical Appointments ...................... 47 Table 3-15. Current and Preferred Information Sources .............................................................. 48 Table 5-1. Initial Extended On-Demand Service Projections ....................................................... 62 Table 6-1. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Services .............................................................. 69 Table 6-2. Proposed Changes to Dial-A-Ride Services ............................................................... 70 Table 6-3. Recommended Changes to Shoulder Hour PMOD & Fresno Connector .................. 72 Table 6-4. Summary of Proposed Scenarios and Projected Impacts .......................................... 73 Table 6-5. Summary of Route by Service..................................................................................... 73 Table 7-1. On-Demand Microtransit Service KPIs ....................................................................... 86 Table of Contents
Table of Figures
Figure ES-1. DAR & Paratransit Ridership by Fiscal Quarter........................................................ 2 Figure ES-2. Fixed-Route Ridership by Fiscal Quarter.................................................................. 2 Figure ES-3. Riders per Revenue Hour for Q2 of FY25/26 ........................................................... 3 Figure ES-4. Current Demand Among Transit Users..................................................................... 4 Figure ES-5. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Network ............................................................ 6 Figure ES-6. Proposed Madera On-Demand Microtransit Zone with Extended Hours................. 7 Figure ES-7. Proposed Fresno Connector Service through PMOD subsidies .............................. 7 Figure 2-1. Madera Population Density........................................................................................ 16 Figure 2-2. Household Income Distribution – Regional Comparison .......................................... 17 Figure 2-3. Vehicle Ownership by Household (The City of Madera) ........................................... 19 Figure 2-4. Current Demand Among Transit Users...................................................................... 19 Figure 2-5. Madera Metro Fixed-Route Network.......................................................................... 22 Figure 2-6. Metro Fixed-Route Performance Summary, 2020 – 2024......................................... 25 Figure 2-7. Total Operating Cost, 2020 - 2024............................................................................. 26 Figure 2-8. Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, 2020 - 2024................................... 26 Figure 2-9. Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, 2020 – 2024 ................................................ 26 Figure 2-10. Boardings per Hour and per Capita, 2020 – 2024 .................................................. 26 Figure 2-11. 2024/2025 System Ridership ................................................................................... 27 Figure 2-12. 2024/2025 System Ridership - Graph ..................................................................... 27 Figure 2-13. Distribution of Annual Ridership by Route (FY 2024-2025) .................................... 28 Figure 2-14. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025)...................................................... 28 Figure 2-15. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025)...................................................... 29 Figure 2-16. Riders per Revenue Hour by Route (2025)............................................................. 29 Figure 2-17. Peer Agency Review (2023) .................................................................................... 30 Figure 2-18. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Service Area .................................................................. 31 Figure 2-19. Annual Operating Statistics and KPIs - DAR & ADA/Paratransit (2020-2024) ....... 31 Figure 2-20. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025).............................. 33 Figure 2-21. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025) – Graph ............... 33 Figure 2-22. Fleet Inventory.......................................................................................................... 35 Figure 3-1. Familiarity with On-Demand Microtransit Before the Survey .................................... 43 Figure 5-1. Map of Baseline Scenario .......................................................................................... 56 Figure 5-2. Map of Option A - Fixed-Route Modified: Maximum Cost Efficiency ........................ 58 Figure 5-3. Map of Option B - Fixed-Route Modified: Maximum Ridership................................. 60 Figure 5-4. Map of Option C – On-Demand Only ........................................................................ 61 Figure 6-1. Recommended Approach .......................................................................................... 66 Figure 6-2. Recommended Approach - Including Entire Service Area ........................................ 67 Figure 6-3. Recommended Approach (Zoomed Out)................................................................... 68 Figure 7-1. Phased Implementation Approach............................................................................. 84 Executive Summary
pg. 1
Executive Summary
The City of Madera initiated this Microtransit Feasibility Study to evaluate how its transit system can better meet existing and future mobility needs. Madera Metro currently provides fixed-route, Dial-A-Ride (DAR), and ADA/Paratransit services, but the City recognizes that gaps remain in coverage, convenience, and overall system performance.

This study builds on prior planning efforts by evaluating both existing services and potential new service models in a coordinated way. The intent is to identify practical, implementable strategies that improve mobility, increase system efficiency, and better align transit services with how people travel in Madera today.

Current System Challenges
Throughout the study, the team conducted community outreach, stakeholder engagement, and quantitative analysis to assess and understand the transportation challenges facing Madera residents and the performance of the existing Madera Metro system. As part of that analysis, several key themes emerged.

1. Residents want faster and more reliable service. Lengthy walk distances to stops, infrequent service, having to wait for service in inclement weather, and inconsistent ontime performance all contribute to the perception that transit is not convenient or dependable.

2. Residents are interested in on-demand transportation. While they are not at this time fully willing to forgo fixed-route transportation, an overwhelming majority of survey respondents and stakeholders expressed interest in using on-demand microtransit. In analyzing the data, we also see that in recent months, growth in ridership is primarily driven by growth in DAR trips rather than fixed-route. Figure ES-1 presents DAR and paratransit ridership by fiscal quarter, where the DAR trend shows a modest early dip followed by a steady overall increase, reaching its highest level in the most recent quarter.

Additionally, Figure ES-2 shows a decline in fixed-route ridership in the last quarter, further supporting a shift in demand toward on-demand services.

Executive Summary
pg. 2
Figure ES-1. DAR & Paratransit Ridership by Fiscal Quarter Figure ES-2. Fixed-Route Ridership by Fiscal Quarter
Executive Summary
pg. 3

3. Current fixed-routes are not structured in a way that is meeting demand efficiently.

Long wait times, inefficient routes, and underused routes consume resources and limiting hours of coverage and other opportunities to enhance service. The result is a high cost per trip, suggesting that many trips may be more efficiently served by on-demand microtransit from an operational perspective. As shown in Figure ES-2, there is a decline in ridership in the most recent quarter, further indicating weakening performance. In addition, Figure ES-3, highlights trips per revenue hour by route, where routes such as 3 and 4 average roughly one trip per revenue hour, suggesting these underutilized routes may be contributing to higher cost per trip and inefficient use of resources.

Figure ES-3. Riders per Revenue Hour for Q2 of FY25/26
Executive Summary
pg. 4
Figure ES-4. Current Demand Among Transit Users

4. Services could be expanded to better meet the needs of early morning and later evening travelers, weekend travelers, and travelers to and from Fresno for medical appointments and school. Opportunities to supplement current services with other flexible on demand service delivery types would improve access to more destinations at more hours for these travelers. See Figure ES-4 for a summary of current demand among transit users within the Madera service area.

5. The public lacks information about the services the City provides. Throughout the course of this study, it became clear that residents do not have a good understanding of what options are currently available to them and how to best use the system to meet their needs. Any future changes to the system represent an opportunity to improve communication and public awareness, ensuring that transit services are clearly understood and accessible to the community.

Executive Summary
pg. 5
Proposed Solution
After careful analysis of the leading alternatives and incorporating feedback from the community as well as City staff, our team is proposing a hybrid approach. This proposed system would maintain essential fixed-routes with higher demand and improve those fixed-routes in terms of their structure and headways, while also rolling out on-demand microtransit service and introducing complementary personal mobility on-demand (PMOD) enhancements. In so doing, the City will have the opportunity to combine the most reliable and efficient elements of fixed-route service while introducing more modern and scalable mobility options, without sacrificing coverage or increasing the overall budget. The result would be a more reliable and accessible transit network.

Specifically, based on study outcomes, it is recommended to convert DAR service to a modernized on-demand microtransit service with expanded hours, improved customer experience, and enhanced connectivity to key destinations, including select locations in Fresno.

Then, we suggest modifying the Purple and Orange lines to be more linear and operate with more consistent 30-minute headways. Lower performing routes and route segments would then be eliminated, and service in those areas would be provided through improved on-demand microtransit. All of these changes together are projected to increase ridership while reducing overall system costs. The proposed alternative is summarized in Figure ES-5 through Figure ES-7 below:

Executive Summary
pg. 6
Figure ES-5. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Network
Executive Summary
pg. 7
Figure ES-6. Proposed Madera On-Demand Microtransit Zone with Extended Hours Figure ES-7. Proposed Fresno Connector Service through PMOD subsidies Executive Summary
pg. 8
Specific proposed changes to the fixed-route and on-demand services are outlined in Table ES-1 and Table ES-2 below.

Table ES-1. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Services

METRIC BASELINE SCENARIO PROPOSED SCENARIO CHANGE
Route 1 (Purple Line /
Cleveland Ave)
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $726,390/yr
Ridership: 30,000–34,600
Hours: 7-6:30pm Weekdays, 9-4pm
Weekends
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $828,576/yr
Ridership: 32,900–42,700
Unchanged service span
✓ More direct routing
✓ More reliable
headways
✓ Focus on highestdemand corridor
✓ +2,900–8,100 riders
Route 2 (Orange Line /
Yosemite Ave)
Headway: 60 min
Cost: $726,390/yr
Ridership: 22,100–24,400
Hours: 7-6:30pm Weekdays, 9-4pm
Weekends
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $828,576/yr
Ridership: 19,700–26,300
Unchanged service span
✓ 2x frequency
improvement
✓ More direct routing
✓ Improved travel time
reliability
Route 3 (Green Line) Headway: 60 min Cost: $647,010/yr
Ridership: 10,300–13,400
Now served by on-demand
microtransit
✓ Riders served at
comparable or even
faster travel times
✓ ~$647K redirected to
higher-demand
corridors
Executive Summary
pg. 9

METRIC BASELINE SCENARIO PROPOSED SCENARIO CHANGE
Route 4 (Blue Line) Headway: 60 min Cost: $238,140/yr
Ridership: 2,300–3,800
Now served by on-demand
microtransit
✓ Riders served at
comparable or even
faster travel times
✓ ~$238K redirected
to core service with
higher demand
Table ES-2. Proposed Changes to Dial-A-Ride Services

SERVICE ASPECT BASELINE (DIAL-A-RIDE) PROPOSED (MICROTRANSIT) CHANGE Operating Hours Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm Saturday:
9am–4pm Sunday: 8:30am–2:30pm
Weekdays: same Saturday: 9am–
6:30pm (+2.5 hrs)
Sunday: same
✓ Expanded weekend
service hours
✓ Better alignment with
community travel needs
Annual Operating Cost $1,757,340 $2,327,940
+$570,600 (expanded
service, improved fleet)
(Note: Costs may
decrease through
competitive
procurement; we
assumed current cost
per hour which is high
relative to industry
benchmarks)
Projected Annual Ridership 21,500–32,200 32,300–47,900 +10,800–15,700 riders

SERVICE DESCRIPTION & MODEL OPERATING HOURS COST &

RIDERSHIP
Executive Summary
pg. 11
Shoulder Hour PMOD (Within
Madera)
-City-subsidized shared-ride PMOD trips
(Uber/Lyft) to fill early morning and evening
gaps
-Pay-per-trip model
Weekdays: 6–7am, 6:30–
8pm
Saturday: 6:30–8pm
Cost:
~$3,750/yr
Riders: 250–
1,300
Fresno Connector
-On-demand service connecting Madera to
Fresno
-Can transition to scheduled shuttle if
demand grows, with minimal cost increase
while maintaining coverage
-Evaluates long-term regional connectivity
demand
Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm
Cost:
~$34,500/yr
Riders: 1,200–
3,500
Summary and Projected Impacts
The recommended approach results in measurable changes to system performance, cost, and service delivery. Summary and key projected impacts are presented in Table ES-3 and Table ES-4 below.

Executive Summary
pg. 12
Table ES-3. Summary of Proposed Changes and Projected Impact

METRIC BASELINE SCENARIO PROPOSED SCENARIO CHANGE
Estimated Annual Ridership 86,100 – 108,300 86,300 – 121,600 +300 to +13,300 riders Total Annual Operating Cost ~$4,095,270 ~$4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%) Cost Per Trip $38 $33 -$5 per trip (↓ 13%)
Number of Fixed-Routes 4 routes 2 routes Strategic consolidation to core corridors
On-Demand Service Type Traditional DAR On-demand microtransit Modernized service delivery and
customer experience, expanded
hours
Supplemental On-Demand
Services None
Subsidized shared-ride Uber/Lyft
trips during shoulder hours and to
Fresno
Expanded hours; improved
access to Fresno medical
appointments and college
classes
Executive Summary
pg. 13
Table ES-4. Cost Summary by Route / Service

SERVICE BASELINE COST PROPOSED COST DIFFERENCE
Dial-A-Ride / Microtransit $1,757,340 $2,327,940 +$570,600 Route 1 (Purple) $726,390 $828,576 +$102,186
Route 2 (Orange) $726,390 $828,576 +$102,186
Route 3 (Green) $647,010 $0 -$647,010
Route 4 (Blue) $238,140 $0 -$238,140
Shoulder Hour PMOD $0 $3,750 +$3,750
Fresno Connector $0 $34,500 +$34,500
TOTAL SYSTEM $4,095,270 $4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%)
Executive Summary
pg. 14
Overall, the recommended service approach maintains the core elements of the existing system while introducing targeted improvements to better meet community needs. Fixed-route service continues along key corridors and to critical destinations, ensuring stability and continuity for current riders, while ADA accessibility remains a central priority. At the same time, the system is restructured to provide more direct trips, shorter wait times, and expanded service hours. The addition of on-demand microtransit provides flexible, citywide coverage that complements fixedroutes and improves overall convenience. New pilot programs, including early morning and evening service and potential regional connections, allow the City to test and refine service enhancements before broader implementation.

These improvements are designed to be achieved within the existing budget by using resources more efficiently and focusing investment where it delivers the greatest benefit. The result is a system that provides more transportation options, faster and more reliable trips, and improved access to jobs, education, healthcare, and essential services, ultimately enhancing equity and accessibility through mobility for Madera residents. Overall, the proposed service plan achieves both VMT reduction and cost savings while improving ridership - an uncommon and highly favorable outcome.

A Way Forward
Implementing these changes to service should be done in phases. It is recommended that the first phase focuses on replacing DAR with on-demand microtransit, followed by the implementation of a pilot for personal mobility on-demand services (shoulder hours and connector service to Fresno). Then, a second phase would focus on changes to the fixed-route network.

Throughout all of these modifications, marketing and communication will be paramount to the success of the service. Execution of the marketing, branding, and communication strategy found in this report will help the City ensure that the community is receiving correct and updated information about the services available to them and will help foster growth and sustain success of the transit program.

Introduction
pg. 15
1 Introduction
The City of Madera engaged in a Microtransit Feasibility Study to evaluate how its transit system can evolve to better serve the community’s mobility needs. While Madera Metro provides a combination of fixed-route, Dial-a-Ride (DAR), and ADA/Paratransit services, the City recognizes that many residents still face barriers in accessing reliable, convenient, and equitable transportation. As the population grows and travel patterns shift, the need to evaluate more modern, flexible, technology-enabled options such as microtransit has become paramount.

This effort is built on the findings of the City’s previous Madera Transit Plan, which identified persistent challenges in network connectivity and service gaps for seniors, students, and lowincome households. That earlier process ultimately led to a system redesign of fixed-route service, strengthening the core network. However, it did not evaluate Dial-a-Ride operations or consider flexible, on-demand services as part of the solution. At the same time, new technologies being piloted for fixed-route (Tripshot) and DAR (Spare) are creating an opportunity to rethink how information is disseminated and how on-demand bookings can take place. As a result, the team engaged in this study to evaluate different service options that address both equity and productivity concerns and incorporate both fixed-route and on-demand services. By explicitly connecting these service types, the City can better understand how they complement one another, where they overlap, and when and where changes may be most effective.

This report summarizes the findings from the study, including existing conditions analysis, community engagement, service design alternatives, and final recommendations for a phased implementation of modified service. It also creates a high-level marketing, communications, and outreach strategy for communicating future changes and transit information to the community.

The goal of these recommendations is to make transit services in Madera more useful, reliable, and cost-effective, while ensuring that no one in Madera is left without access.

Existing Conditions
pg. 16
2 Existing Conditions
Foundational to any study is the deep understanding of both community demographics as well as travel patterns and existing transit services. This analysis sets the stage for what areas of improvement there may be for on-demand microtransit services to address. The full existing conditions report can be found in Appendix A – Existing Conditions.

2.1 Demographics
The City of Madera is home to approximately 69,000 residents, having experienced steady population growth over the past decade. Population density as seen in Figure 2-1, is highest in the north and northeast parts of the city. Many residences are in neighborhoods near E. Yosemite Ave. and E. Cleveland Ave. However, several dense blocks also exist in select portions of the south end of the City, in Parkwood, as well as a couple neighborhoods in the west, such as those along Driftwood Dr. Lower-density residential development extends toward the city's edges, particularly in the west and near Parksdale.

Figure 2-1. Madera Population Density
Madera’s population is relatively young, but aging. While residents under the age of 19 continue to represent a large share of the population, the most significant growth since 2010 has occurred among adults ages 20–44, 45–64, and 65 and older. The population of residents 45-64 grew nearly 25% from 2010 to 2024. Table 2-1 presents a breakdown of population trends by age group between 2010 and 2024.

Existing Conditions
pg. 17
Table 2-1. Population Trends by Age Group: Absolute and Percentage Change (The City of Madera) AGE GROUP 2010 2024 ABSOLUTE
CHANGE % CHANGE
Under 19 22,926 24,582 1,656 7.2%
20 – 44 21,018 25,648 4,630 22%
45 – 64 13,453 17,805 4,352 24.5%
65+ 5,118 6,220 1,102 21.5%
Madera is characterized by a predominantly Hispanic or Latino population, with more than 80 percent of residents identifying as Hispanic or Latino. As seen in Figure 2-2, Median household incomes in Madera are lower than regional averages, and poverty rates remain elevated.

Figure 2-2. Household Income Distribution – Regional Comparison Why it Matters
Madera’s demographic profile has direct implications for how transit services should be designed and delivered. Population growth is occurring across multiple age groups, with especially strong increases among working-age adults and older adults. This reinforces the need for a system that can support both traditional commute trips and non-work travel such as medical appointments, shopping, and social services. Growth in the senior population Existing Conditions
pg. 18
underscores the importance of accessible vehicles, curb-to-curb options, and services that are easy to understand and use without relying exclusively on smartphones.

At the same time, the city’s large youth and young adult population highlights the continued importance of reliable transportation to schools, Madera Community College, and earlycareer employment. These markets often generate trips outside of traditional peak commute periods and may not align well with infrequent or circuitous fixed-route service.

Lower median household incomes and higher poverty rates increase sensitivity to travel costs and reliability. For many households, even those with access to a vehicle, transit may play an important role in enabling daily mobility when vehicles are unavailable, shared among multiple household members, or too costly to operate regularly. Together, these demographic conditions suggest that Madera’s transit system must balance affordability, flexibility, and accessibility, and that a one-size-fits-all service model is unlikely to meet the needs of all riders effectively.

2.2 Travel Patterns
Travel patterns in Madera reflect a mix of local circulation needs and regional commuting. Per 2022 NHTS data, it is noteworthy that trips originating in Madera County with a destination in Fresno County represented one of the top 100 Origin-Destination (OD) pairs for all travel nationally with nearly 39 million trips. Over 27 million of those trips were for non-work purposes, too, indicating that most travel from Madera to Fresno is for other purposes like social, medical, or shopping needs. Still, over 150 million trips took place within the county, indicating that local travel is still predominant.

As seen in Figure 2-3, Vehicle ownership data indicate that 91% of households have access to at least one vehicle, meaning most travel in the City is done by private vehicle. This largely mirrors national averages.

Figure 2-3. Vehicle Ownership by Household (The City of Madera) Existing Conditions
pg. 19
Still, there are 9% of non-vehicle households for which significant mobility constraints may exist.

Even in one-vehicle households, transit often plays a critical role for secondary trips, off-peak travel, and trips made by non-drivers. This population represents dependent riders who utilize transit or other modes for their everyday needs. Beyond that, attractive transit services may further entice other car-heavy households to ride, though the conversion of drivers to transit once they have a car is a well-documented, difficult prospect.

Analysis of fixed-route and on-demand ridership data indicates strong trip activity to destinations such as Madera Community College, Walmart, Walgreens, grocery stores (including Rancho San Miguel and El Toro), the Intermodal Transit Center, the Sherwood Way and Country Club Drive area, and the Madera Department of Corrections. Yosemite Ave. is the densest corridor for trips.

Figure 2-4. Current Demand Among Transit Users
Major employment centers within the City include the Madera Unified School District, Madera Community Hospital, manufacturing and industrial employers near Highway 99, and large retail centers such as Walmart. Some residents also commute regionally to Fresno, or to agricultural jobs in other parts of Madera County.

Existing Conditions
pg. 20
In addition to existing employment centers, new development is expected to generate additional travel demand. Notably, the planned North Fork Mono Casino is anticipated to create a substantial number of new jobs with non-traditional work hours, further increasing demand for off-peak and late-night transportation options that are difficult to serve with fixed-route service alone. Figure 2-4 provides a map of current demand among transit users.

Why it Matters
Travel behavior in Madera reflects a combination of constrained vehicle access, dispersed trip purposes, and a strong need for local circulation. While overall vehicle ownership is relatively high, the prevalence of one-vehicle and zero-vehicle households creates consistent demand for transit among groups including but not limited to students, seniors, and households with competing travel needs. Even among households with vehicles, transit often functions as a critical secondary option, particularly for off-peak trips, non-drivers, and essential travel.

Travel via the transit system is dispersed, but the highest level of concentration exists along Cleveland and Yosemite Avenues. Stops such as Walgreens, the Intermodal, and local supermarkets generate the most ridership along fixed-routes. At the same time, there are many trips being served by DAR within the zone that are not served by fixed-routes.

Taken together, these travel patterns highlight a fundamental challenge for the existing system: fixed-route transit alone struggles to efficiently serve the full range of trip types, locations, and times demanded by riders. Understanding where and when demand is concentrated helps to evaluate alternative service models and identify opportunities to improve both productivity and customer experience.

2.3 Transit Services and Policies
Public transit plays a critical role in ensuring mobility, accessibility, and equity within urban and rural communities. In Madera, the local transit system serves as a vital link connecting residents to employment, education, healthcare, and regional destinations. Understanding how the transit system performs is essential for guiding improvements, allocating resources effectively, and meeting the community’s evolving mobility needs.

The City contracts with MV Public Transportation, Inc. for the provision of key personnel and management of transit services. The term of the current contract is from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027, with an option to extend for one additional year, through to June 30, 2028. The City completed the construction of the Madera Transit Center located at 1951 Independence Drive. The facility opened in the Fall of 2020 and provides facilities for parking and dispatch of transit vehicles, as well as housing administrative functions. The City’s Fleet Services / Fleet Maintenance Division handles maintenance of transit vehicles. Maintenance is performed at the City Corporation Yard, and vehicles are fueled at either Tesei Petroleum or Madera Unified School District pumps.

This analysis provides a review of the City’s transit operations, focusing on service efficiency, ridership trends, and overall system effectiveness. By examining key performance metrics such Existing Conditions
pg. 21
as on-time performance, passenger trips per revenue hour, cost per passenger, and service coverage, this study aims to identify strengths, challenges, and opportunities for optimization.

Additionally, the analysis contextualizes Madera transit’s performance relative to peer systems and national benchmarks, providing decision-makers with actionable insights for strategic planning and future investment.

2.3.1 Madera Metro Fixed-Route
Figure 2-5 presents a map of the current Madera Metro route network. Salient aspects of the route network include:
• Madera Metro currently operates four fixed-routes (Purple / Route 1, Orange / Route 2, Green / Route 3, Blue / Route 4).
• Fixed-route service runs weekdays 7:00 a.m. – 6:30 p.m., and Saturdays 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
• Fares for fixed-routes have been waived (fare-free) until further notice. • Notably: Green (Route 3) and Blue (Route 4) do not run on Saturdays • The Blue Line’s scheduled stop at the Amtrak Station is paused as of the latest updates; currently its terminal is Matilda Torres High School.
• Key transfer points exist for multiple routes at the Intermodal Center (downtown Madera) and Walgreens.

Existing Conditions
pg. 22
Figure 2-5. Madera Metro Fixed-Route Network
The following provides salient aspects for each of the four routes:

Table 2-2. Salient Aspects per Route
ROUTE

KEY STREETS / CORRIDORS
SERVED

MAJOR STOPS / LANDMARKS

FREQUENCY &

OPERATION
Route 1
Purple
Primarily serves Cleveland,
Yosemite, Olive, Tozer, Almond
Walgreens at Cleveland, Intermodal
Center, P & Yosemite, Madera South
High School, Madera Community
Hospital
~30 min headways
typical. See more
information here.

Existing Conditions
pg. 23
ROUTE

KEY STREETS / CORRIDORS
SERVED

MAJOR STOPS / LANDMARKS

FREQUENCY &

OPERATION
Route 2
Orange
Covers Granada, Stadium,
Pecan, Tozer, Olive corridors
Intermodal Center, P & Yosemite,
Madera South High, various west /
southwest neighborhoods
Less frequent than
Route 1 — typical
round-trip time ~60
minutes.

Route 3
Green
Through Schnoor, Howard, Stadi
um, Pecan corridors
toward Madera Community
College
P & Yosemite, Madera South High
School, Madera College, various
neighborhoods along Howard / Schnoor
Runs Monday–Friday
only (no Saturday
service).

Route 4
Blue
East-west / northern corridors,
parts of northeastern Madera
Matilda Torres High School (current
terminus), Intermodal transfers, other
shared stops
Weekdays only (no
Saturday service)

2.3.2 Route Design Characteristics

1. Hub-and-Spoke Structure
o The system is centered around a downtown transfer point, where three of the four routes converge.
o This design enables easy transfers between routes, increasing connectivity across the system.

2. Fixed-Routes with Loops
o Each route generally operates as a one-way or bi-directional loop, covering residential areas, commercial zones, schools, and public services. o This loop structure allows for broad coverage while minimizing the need for multiple transfers.

3. Geographic Coverage
o The routes are designed to cover all major quadrants of the city, ensuring that most residents are within walking distance of a stop.
o Routes are structured to provide access to:
▪ Downtown Madera
▪ Government buildings and the civic center
▪ Shopping centers
▪ Medical facilities
▪ Schools and colleges
▪ Residential neighborhoods
Existing Conditions
pg. 24

4. Service Frequency & Hours
o Routes typically operate on weekday schedules, with limited or no service on weekends.
o Frequencies may vary by route, with more frequent service on high-demand corridors (e.g., Route 1).
o Hours of service are generally designed to accommodate commuting, school travel, and midday errands.

Transfers & Interconnectivity
• Routes 1, 2, and 3 are designed to allow transfers at a central location, the Intermodal Center Bus Station, in downtown Madera.
• Routes 1, 2, 3, and 4 are designed to also facilitate transfers at the Walgreens, another key destination for riders.
• This setup enables citywide mobility even though each individual route operates as a loop or radial.

Strengths of the Route Structure
• Simple and easy to understand: Fewer routes with consistent paths. • Broad coverage of the City despite a small fleet.
• Centralized transfer point helps riders access most destinations with one transfer.

Challenges
• Loop routes may increase travel time for some trips.
• Limited frequency can make transfers inconvenient.
• Weekend or evening service gaps may reduce accessibility for certain populations.

Madera Metro Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
The analysis of the Madera Metro transit system reveals insights into operational efficiency, service effectiveness, and rider experience. Key performance indicators (KPIs) identify opportunities for improvement.

Summary operating statistics and key performance indicators for the five-year period – 2020 through 20241 are presented in Figure 2-6.
1 Of note: the Covid pandemic: 2020/21
Existing Conditions
pg. 25
Figure 2-6. Metro Fixed-Route Performance Summary, 2020 – 2024 Key Takeaways (2020-2024 KPIs)
• Increased Costs: Net operating costs increased by 56.6% o Net cost per boarding increased by 67.7%
o Net cost per revenue hour increased by 65.4% while the number of revenue hours saw a slight decline of 5.4%
• Declining Ridership: Annual boardings decreased by 6.6% o Boardings per revenue hour declined only 2.1%
o Annual boardings per capita declined 10.4%
For this same five-year period, Total Operating Cost, Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, and Boardings per Hour and per Capita, are presented in Figure 2-7 through Figure 2-10, respectively.

Existing Conditions
pg. 26
Figure 2-7. Total Operating Cost, 2020 - 2024 Figure 2-8. Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, 2020 - 2024 Figure 2-9. Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, 2020 – 2024 Figure 2-10. Boardings per Hour and per Capita, 2020 – 2024 Existing Conditions
pg. 27
2024/2025 Metro Ridership
Figure 2-11 and Figure 2-12 present fixed-route ridership by month for each of the four routes, for the 2024-2025 fiscal period.

Figure 2-13 illustrates the distribution of annual ridership by route (2024/2025).

Figure 2-11. 2024/2025 System Ridership
Figure 2-12. 2024/2025 System Ridership - Graph
MONTH ROUTE 1 ROUTE 2 ROUTE 3 ROUTE 4
FR

MONTHLY
TOTAL
July 3,341 2,146 430 253 6,170
August 3,025 2,540 781 179 6,525
September 2,495 2,068 1,269 198 6,030
October 2,686 1,803 1,653 228 6,370
November 2,504 1,597 1,125 235 5,461
December 2,465 1,627 804 185 5,081
January 2,898 2,260 1,252 369 6,779
February 2,863 1,926 1,238 339 6,366
March 2,942 2,151 1,325 334 6,752
April 3,261 2,376 1,152 345 7,134
May 3,156 2,234 1,118 346 6,854
June 2,848 2,306 594 276 6,024
SUBTOTALS 34,484 25,034 12,741 3,287 75,546
Existing Conditions
pg. 28
Figure 2-13. Distribution of Annual Ridership by Route (FY 2024-2025) The current distribution of revenue hours by route is presented in Figure 2-14 and Figure 2-15.

Figure 2-16 presents the number of trips per revenue hour by route.

Figure 2-14. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025) Existing Conditions
pg. 29
Figure 2-15. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025) Figure 2-16. Riders per Revenue Hour by Route (2025)

2.3.2.1 Peer Agency Review
The purpose of this Peer Agency Review was to evaluate Madera Metro's transit services by comparing them to those of similar-sized and similarly structured transit agencies. This process allows Madera Metro to benchmark its performance and will inform the development of service improvement strategies including the feasibility of microtransit to improve local transit service delivery, efficiency, and rider satisfaction.

The Peer Agency Review is presented in Figure 2-17.

Existing Conditions
pg. 30
Figure 2-17. Peer Agency Review (2023)

2.3.3 Dial-A-Ride & ADA/Paratransit
Madera Metro’s Dial-A-Ride service is a curb-to-curb, demand-responsive transit service available to the general public within the City. It is designed to serve residents who may not have easy access to the fixed-route bus system, including seniors, people with disabilities, and those traveling outside of fixed-route coverage or service hours.

DAR’s service hours are:
• Monday—Friday: 7:00am—6:30pm
• Saturday: 9:00am—4:00pm
• Sunday: 8:30am—2:30pm
DAR is free for people under 17 years of age, seniors (60+), people with disabilities, veterans, and college students with ID. Others pay a $3.00 fare.

The City of Madera Transit Services provides ADA/Paratransit service for Seniors (60+), Veterans, and ADA-eligible passengers. This service provides complementary curb-to-curb transportation for individuals who are unable to use the fixed-route bus system due to a disability. Riders must be certified as ADA-eligible through an application and approval process. Trips must be scheduled at least one day in advance, though same-day service may be offered if space is available.

Figure 2-18 illustrates the DAR and ADA/Paratransit service area.

Agency Population Fixed Route
Ridership
Ridership
per Capita
Operating
Expenses
Cost per
Mile
Cost per
Hour
Cost per
Passenger
Cost per
Capita
Trips per
Hour
Madera 68,083 62,770 0.92 $1,584,061 $7.79 $112.14 $25.24 $23.27 4.4 Fresno 591,531 8,184,511 13.84 $63,053,188 $13.04 $147.79 $7.70 $106.59 19.2 Merced (JPA) 136,957 545,587 3.98 $13,045,223 $8.11 $123.11 $23.91 $95.25 5.1 Porterville (2022) 75,691 223,914 2.96 $2,911,372 $9.20 $104.76 $13.00 $38.46 8.1 Visalia 171,092 581,405 3.40 $13,046,075 $7.43 $109.93 $22.44 $76.25 4.9 Tracy 93,000 100,139 1.08 $4,157,019 $14.98 $175.14 $41.51 $44.70 4.2 Lodi 67,258 168,641 2.51 $2,902,728 $11.89 $139.65 $17.21 $43.16 8.1 Kings County 85,025 424,837 5.00 $5,154,467 $7.30 $117.73 $12.13 $60.62 9.7 Kern Regional 155,249 155,105 1.00 $6,156,170 $3.69 $143.50 $39.69 $39.65 3.6 Average of Peer
Agencies *
112,039 314,233 3 $6,767,579.14 $8.94 $130.55 $24.27 $56.87 6.2 * excludes Fresno
Existing Conditions
pg. 31
Figure 2-18. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Service Area
Figure 2-19 presents annual (calendar year 2020 – 2024) operating statistics and KPIs for the DAR and ADA/Paratransit services.

Figure 2-19. Annual Operating Statistics and KPIs - DAR & ADA/Paratransit (2020-2024) Existing Conditions
pg. 32
Key Takeaways (calendar year 2020-2024 KPIs):
• Increased Costs: Net operating costs increased by 26.4% o Net cost per boarding declined by 8.8%
o Net cost per revenue hour increased by 27.6% while the number of revenue hours saw a slight decline of 1%
• Increased Ridership: Annual boardings increased by 38.6% o Boardings per revenue hour increased 37.5% (indicator of increased productivity) o Annual boardings per capita increased 36.8%

2.3.3.1 2024/2025 DAR & ADA/Paratransit Ridership
Figure 2-20 and Figure 2-21 present DAR and ADA/Paratransit ridership by month for the 2024- 2025 fiscal period.

Of note, there is a marginal seasonal fluctuation in demand with slight peaking in demand in the Fall and Spring months.

Existing Conditions
pg. 33
Figure 2-20. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024- 2025)
Figure 2-21. DAR and ADA/Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025) – Graph
Existing Conditions
pg. 34

2.3.4 Technology
To enhance the efficiency, accessibility, and user experience of its transit services, Madera Metro has recently deployed (September 2025) two key technology platforms: TripShot and Spare Labs.

These tools support the city's efforts to modernize both fixed-route operations and on-demand transit services, providing real-time data, digital trip management, and improved communication between riders and transit staff.

TripShot - Fixed-Route Operations Management:

TripShot is used to manage Madera Metro’s fixed-route bus system, offering real-time vehicle tracking, schedule
adherence monitoring, and improved coordination for
operations staff. It also enhances the rider experience by providing up-to-date bus arrival information and alerts through mobile and web applications.

Spare Labs - Demand-Responsive Transit Platform:

Spare Labs powers Madera Metro’s ADA/Paratransit and
DAR services. This platform allows eligible riders to book, modify, and track their trips through a user-friendly mobile app or call-in interface.

Existing Conditions
pg. 35

2.4 Vehicle Fleet
The City currently has a fleet of 21 vehicles (including spares), as shown in Figure 2-22. Thirteen vehicles are designated to operate fixed-routes, and 8 vehicles are used to operate DAR and ADA/Paratransit. Vehicles are maintained by the City’s Public Works Department.

Figure 2-22. Fleet Inventory

2.4.1 Regional Transit Services
The following profiles the range of regional transit services designed to connect urban centers, rural communities, medical facilities, and key destinations both inside and outside City limits. The goal is to ensure mobility for those without private transportation, link communities, and support economic, healthcare, educational, and recreational access across the county and beyond.

Key Providers & Service Types
• Madera County Connection (MCC): A primary intercity fixed-route bus network connecting cities like Madera and Chowchilla, as well as smaller unincorporated areas.

Includes fixed-routes, DAR services, and senior and medical escort services.

Bus # Service Year Make Model Fuel Type #SEATS LENGTH DELIVERY

DATE LIFT ULB
39 DAR 2012 Ford E-450 Elkhart GAS 18/2 26 FT 2012 X -2 40 DAR 2012 Ford E-450 Elkhart CNG 18/2 26 FT 2012 X -2 43 DAR 2013 Ford E-450 Starcraft CNG 18/2 26 FT 2014 X -1 44 FR 2013 Ford E-450 Starcraft CNG 18/2 26 FT 2014 X -2 45 FR 2013 Ford E-450 Starcraft CNG 18/2 26 FT 2014 X -2 46 DAR 2013 Ford E-450 Starcraft CNG 18/2 26 FT 2014 X -1 47 FR 2019 Ford E-450 Starcraft GAS 17 26 FT 2019 X 7
48 DAR 2019 Ford E-450 Starcraft GAS 17 26 FT 2019 X 5
49 FR 2019 Chevy 4500 Arboc GAS 17 26 FT 2019 X 7
50 FR 2019 Chevy 4500 Arboc GAS 17 26 FT 2019 X 7
51 FR 2019 Chevy 4500 Arboc GAS 17 26 FT 2019 X 7
52 FR 2020 International Starcraft Diesel 27 32 FT 2019 X 8 53 FR 2020 International Starcraft Diesel 27 32 FT 2019 X 8 54 FR 2019 Aero Elite 320 ElDorado CNG 27 32 FT 2020 X 8 55 FR 2019 Ford F-550 ElDorado CNG 27 32 FT 2020 X 8
56 DAR 2022 Dodge Voyager (Braun) BraunAbility Gas 5/1 Van 2023 X 8 57 DAR 2022 Dodge Voyager (Braun) BraunAbility Gas 5/1 Van 2023 X 8 58 DAR 2022 Dodge Voyager (Braun) BraunAbility Gas 5/1 Van 2023 X 8 59 FR 2023 Ford E-450 Starcraft Gas 18/2 26 FT 2023 X 12 60 FR 2023 Ford E-450 Starcraft Gas 18/2 26 FT 2023 X 12 61 FR 2023 Ford E-450 Starcraft Gas 18/2 26 FT 2023 X 12 FY24/25

FLEET INVENTORY
Existing Conditions
pg. 36
• Chowchilla Area Transit Express (CATX): A demand-response (DAR style) service within Chowchilla and contiguous unincorporated areas. CATX helps serve local mobility, especially for those underserved by fixed-routes.
• Other Supporting Services
o Senior Bus / Medical Escort programs in rural and eastern sections of the county.
o Yosemite Area Regional Transportation System (YARTS): While not exclusively Madera County, YARTS provides seasonal and year-round service along highways that include segments in Madera County, to link communities to Yosemite National Park.
o Private intercity services (like Greyhound) and passenger rail (Amtrak) augment local/regional services. Madera has a train station served by Amtrak’s San Joaquin line.

Community Feedback
pg. 37
3 Community Feedback
Beginning in September 2025, the Flexlynqs team created and distributed surveys to evaluate current perceptions of Madera Metro service and get a better understanding of things that were working well or perhaps not working well from the community perspective. To augment online dissemination of surveys (pushed on social media and the Madera Metro webpage), surveys were also placed on board vehicles and the Flexlynqs team also hosted several pop-up events in the community to encourage survey participation and garner verbal feedback. This initial outreach constituted Phase 1 of the project outreach plan.

In February 2026, once the team had a list of concrete service alternatives and more specific questions about on-demand service established, Phase 2 of the outreach plan was launched to better understand community interest and acceptance of on-demand microtransit specifically and help define the parameters around on-demand microtransit to fine-tune recommendations. A summary of the feedback received during both rounds of engagement is outlined below. More details on the engagement approach and a catalog of survey results and meetings that took place can be found in Appendix C – Outreach Summary Report.

3.1 Phase 1 Outreach

3.1.1 Quantitative Results
Surveys were distributed through eblast to stakeholder contact lists, posted on the project website with links to the City of Madera website, linked to printed material through QR codes. The City conducted a Microtransit Feasibility Survey in 2025, collecting 66 responses from various community locations to understand transportation usage, perceptions of the Madera Metro bus service, and desired transit improvements. The study gathered insights from English and Spanish speakers, as well as a college student survey, highlighting key challenges and preferences regarding public transit in Madera.

3.1.1.1 Perception of Existing Service
Survey responses indicate generally mixed perceptions of Madera Metro service, with a notable share of respondents selecting “Unsure” across multiple service attributes. Please see Table 3-- 1 for further details.

Community Feedback
pg. 38
Table 3-1. Overall Sentiment

EVALUATION RESULT
Overall
Sentiment
“Unsure” was the most common response across key attributes including travel time, punctuality, and overall satisfaction
Positive
Responses
“Often” and “Almost always” were also common, particularly for safety and convenience
This pattern suggests that while many users have positive experiences, a significant portion of the population lacks familiarity or consistent experience with the system.

3.1.1.2 Barriers to Transit Use
Among respondents who do not regularly use transit, several key barriers emerged; Table 3-2 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-2. Reasons for Not Using Transit

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Doesn’t go close enough to destinations 43.18%
Infrequent service 40.68%
Don’t know what bus to take 37.96%
Routes are not direct enough 23.87%
Travel time is too long 21.37%
Limited service hours/days 12.05%
Buses too crowded 7.05%
Safety concerns 2.50%
Would not take transit 2.28%
Community Feedback
pg. 39
The most significant barriers relate to service design and usability, rather than safety or crowding.

3.1.1.3 Desired Improvements
Respondents identified a range of improvements that would make transit more useful and attractive; Table 3-3 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-3. Desired Transit Improvements (Top Responses)

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Better information on how to use the system 66.77%
Expanded weekend service 40.37%
More bus stops 38.43%
Later weeknight service 33.85%
More direct service 25.78%
More shelters or benches 25.55%
Mobile app with real-time information 22.36%
More frequent service 10.87%
On-demand microtransit 8.30%
The most prominent theme is the need for improved information and system usability, followed by expanded service availability and better physical infrastructure.

3.1.1.4 Student Travel Patterns and Preferences
Student survey responses provide additional insight into a key transit-dependent population.

Key findings include:
• Many students do not have consistent access to a personal vehicle and rely on family members for transportation
• Class schedules span throughout the day, requiring service across a broad time window Community Feedback
pg. 40
• Travel patterns are highly directional, with most trips occurring between home and school Student preferences indicate strong support for both structured and flexible service models; Table 3-4 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-4. Student Preferences and Perceptions

STATEMENT AGREE
Prefer on-demand service 90.9%
Prefer fixed-route service 72.7%
Bus provides independence 81.8%
Feel safe riding transit 72.7%
Students also identified several improvements that would encourage greater transit use. Table 3-5 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-5. Student-Identified Improvements

IMPROVEMENT PERCENTAGE
Mobile app for real-time information 63.6%
More direct service / fewer transfers 54.5%
More bus stops 54.5%
More frequent service 45.5%
Later evening service 45.5%
On-demand service options 36.4%
These findings reinforce the importance of reliability, information access, and flexible service options for younger riders.

3.1.1.5 Key Takeaways
Across all survey responses, several consistent conclusions emerge:

Community Feedback
pg. 41
• Personal vehicle use dominates, but a segment of the population remains transitdependent • Awareness and understanding of the system are significant barriers to use • Reliability, frequency, and direct routing are primary concerns • Expanded service hours and improved access to key destinations are high priorities • Interest in flexible, on-demand service exists but is secondary to improving core service usability

3.1.2 Qualitative Feedback
In addition to the quantitative survey results presented above, qualitative feedback was collected through stakeholder discussions and open-ended survey responses. This input provides additional context into how residents experience the system and helps explain the trends observed in the data. While not statistically representative on their own, these perspectives offer valuable insight into user needs and perceptions.

Several consistent themes emerged:
• Reliability and on-time performance
Riders frequently reported that buses arrive late or inconsistently, sometimes by 30 minutes or more. These delays result in missed school start times, difficulty attending appointments, and reliance on costly alternatives such as taxis. • Limited coverage and accessibility
Many residents indicated that they live too far from existing routes or that service does not reach key destinations. Long walks to stops and indirect routing make transit difficult to use, particularly for those without access to a vehicle. • Inefficient routes and long travel times
Existing routes are not always direct, requiring extended travel times for common trips.

This is especially challenging for students and those traveling to major destinations such as Madera Community College or locations outside the city. • Strong reliance on and interest in flexible service
DAR is viewed as an important service, particularly for those outside fixed-route coverage.

There is strong interest in expanding flexible, on-demand options, especially for seniors and individuals without reliable transportation.
• Gaps in service hours and regional connectivity
Respondents identified a need for earlier morning, later evening, and expanded weekend service. Improved connections to Fresno for education, healthcare, and employment were also frequently noted.

Community Feedback
pg. 42
• Barriers related to information and system usability
Many riders expressed confusion about routes, service changes, and how to use the system. Language barriers and limited access to clear, user-friendly information further contribute to these challenges.
• Stop conditions and passenger amenities
Riders highlighted the need for more shelters and improved stop infrastructure to provide protection from weather and improve overall comfort while waiting.

Overall, this qualitative feedback reinforces the need for a system that is more reliable, easier to understand, and more flexible in how it serves different trip types. When combined with the quantitative findings, these insights informed the development of the recommended service approach.

3.2 Phase 2 Outreach
In February 2026, the project team returned to the community to actively seek feedback from residents regarding various on-demand ideas and proposed changes. The team engaged with community members through discussions and surveys to better understand their needs and preferences, ensuring that the proposed initiatives align with the desires of the community.

3.2.1 Quantitative Results
Overall, the results indicate strong interest in on-demand microtransit, especially as a supplement to the existing system. At the same time, respondents made clear that fixed-route service continues to play an important role and should not be fully replaced. Survey responses also reinforce the importance of frequency, reliability, accessible information, and expanded service hours.

3.2.1.1 Awareness and Interest in Microtransit
Prior awareness of on-demand microtransit was relatively limited, but interest in using the service was high once the concept was introduced. Figure 3-1 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Community Feedback
pg. 43
Figure 3-1. Familiarity with On-Demand Microtransit Before the Survey Most respondents were not familiar with on-demand microtransit before taking the survey, indicating a need for public education and outreach if the service is introduced.

Table 3-6. Interest in Using On-Demand Microtransit

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Very interested 55.1%
Somewhat interested 20.3%
Neutral 15.9%
Somewhat uninterested 2.9%
Not interested 5.8%
Taken together, 75.4 percent of respondents indicated positive interest in using on-demand microtransit, despite the fact that most were not previously familiar with the concept. This suggests both a need for public education and a strong base of potential interest. Table 3-6 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

3.2.1.2 Expected Use, Wait Times, and Fare Expectations Respondents indicated that they would use microtransit regularly if it were available, and most expressed expectations for relatively short wait times and low fares.

Community Feedback
pg. 44
Table 3-7. Expected Frequency of Use

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Daily 27.5%
A few times per week 21.7%
A few times per month 33.3%
Rarely 8.7%
Never 8.7%
A combined 82.5 percent of respondents indicated they would use microtransit at least a few times per month, and nearly half indicated they would use it weekly or daily. Table 3-7 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-8. Maximum Acceptable Wait Time for Pickup

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
10 minutes or less 20.3%
15 minutes 26.1%
20 minutes 11.6%
30 minutes 23.2%
More than 30 minutes 11.6%
Expectations cluster around a 10-to-30-minute pickup window, with 15 minutes as the single most selected response. Nearly half of respondents expect pickup within 15 minutes or less. Table 3-8 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Community Feedback
pg. 45
Table 3-9. Fare That Would Feel Like a Good Value

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
I would not pay for this 18.8%
$2 per one-way trip 42.0%
$3 to $4 per one-way trip 15.9%
$5 per one-way trip 11.6%
I would pay anything less than
Uber/Lyft 10.1%
The $2 fare point emerged as the strongest value threshold. At the same time, nearly one in five respondents indicated they would not pay for the service, suggesting that affordability and subsidy remain important considerations. Table 3-9 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

3.2.1.3 Preferred Service Hours and Relationship to Fixed-Routes Support for expanded service hours was strong across all options presented, particularly on weekends and outside current operating hours. Table 3-10 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-10. Interest in Using Microtransit Outside Current Operating Hours

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Early mornings (before 7 a.m.) 55.1%
At night (after 7 p.m.) 50.7%
On Saturdays 60.9%
On Sundays 58.0%
These results suggest broad support for extending service beyond current weekday daytime conditions.

At the same time, respondents were clear that microtransit should complement, not fully replace, fixed-route service.

Community Feedback
pg. 46
Table 3-11. Comfort with Microtransit as the Only Transit Option

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Yes 29.0%
No, I would still need the 4 fixed bus routes 53.6%
I do not use the bus routes now 17.4%
More than half of respondents said they would still need the four fixed-routes, reinforcing the role of a hybrid system. Table 3-11 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-12. Features of Fixed-Routes That Continue to Matter

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
No booking required 40.6%
More predictable schedule 39.1%
I already know how it works 18.8%
Worried on-demand will cost more 18.8%
No app required 15.9%
Worried on-demand will take longer 14.5%
Other 1.4%
Respondents continue to value the ease and predictability of fixed-route service, especially the ability to ride without advance booking. Table 3-12 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

Table 3-13. If Fixed-Routes Were Changed, What Would Matter Most

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Buses come more often (frequency) 52.2%
Better on-time performance 31.9%
Community Feedback
pg. 47

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Routes go more directly to key destinations 30.4%
Later evening service 18.8%
Better weekend service 15.9%
Faster trips (fewer stops) 13.0%
Earlier morning service 11.6%
Other 5.8%
Among potential changes to fixed-route service, increased frequency was the top priority by a wide margin, followed by better on-time performance and more direct routing. Table 3-13 provides a detailed distribution of responses by percentage.

3.2.1.4 Interest in Expanded Services and Communication Preferences Interest in supplemental on-demand service to Fresno was especially strong. 89.9% of respondents indicated interest in On-Demand Service to Fresno for medical appointments. Table 3-14 provides further details.

Table 3-14. Interest in On-Demand Service to Fresno for Medical Appointments

RESPONSE PERCENTAGE
Yes 89.9%
No 1.4%
Not sure 8.7%
This is one of the strongest findings in the Phase 2 survey and indicates substantial demand for regional connectivity.

Survey responses also show that current communication channels are not well aligned with how respondents would prefer to receive information in the future.

Currently, word of mouth is the dominant source of transit information. Looking ahead, respondents expressed a preference for more proactive and visible communication channels, Community Feedback
pg. 48
especially social media, flyers/signage, community events, and mobile applications. Table 3-15 provides further details.

Table 3-15. Current and Preferred Information Sources

CHANNEL CURRENT SOURCE PREFERRED FUTURE SOURCE
Madera Metro website 24.6% 30.4%
Madera Metro app 7.2% 33.3%
Word of mouth 43.5% 24.6%
Social media 11.6% 55.1%
Posted flyers and signs 11.6% 44.9%
Community events 11.6% 34.8%

3.2.1.5 Key Takeaways
Several clear conclusions emerged from the Phase 2 survey results:
• Awareness of microtransit is still limited, but interest in using it is high • Respondents expect relatively short wait times and affordable fares • There is strong support for service outside current operating hours, especially on weekends
• Most respondents do not want microtransit to fully replace fixed-routes • If fixed-routes are modified, frequency and reliability are the top priorities • Interest in a Fresno medical connector is extremely strong • Future communication should rely less on word of mouth and more on digital and community-based channels
These findings suggest that the public is receptive to a hybrid transit model that improves fixedroute service while expanding flexible on-demand options.

Community Feedback
pg. 49

3.3 Summary of Phase 2 Qualitative Feedback
In addition to the survey results, qualitative feedback was collected through the Madera City Hall workshop and the Madera Community College listening sessions, as well as feedback from popups at the Walgreens Transit stop and Flea Market. This input provides additional context on how community members and institutional partners react to the proposed service concepts. While not statistically representative on its own, it helps explain the priorities and implementation issues that surfaced in the survey data.

Several Themes Emerged
• Accessible booking and rider information
Participants emphasized that any on-demand service should support multiple ways to request rides, including phone-based and app-based booking. There was also interest in more visual, multilingual, and accessible tools to better serve riders with different language needs and abilities.
• ADA accessibility and vehicle design
Participants raised questions about whether on-demand vehicles would have wheelchair ramps or lifts and whether the service would provide sufficient ADA-compliant options.

These comments suggest that accessible service design must remain central to implementation.
• Reliability and usability of existing service
Existing transit continues to be viewed as a meaningful option, but concerns remain about buses not arriving on time. Questions about whether a transit app currently exists also reinforce the need for clearer information and improved system visibility. This implies there is keen interest in maintaining but improving some elements of the fixed-route system. • Student transportation barriers
At Madera Community College, participants described transportation as a barrier to education, especially for evening classes. Students reported relying on family, informal parking arrangements, or ride-hailing services, and some noted that they cannot remain on campus for later courses because they do not have a way home. • Regional access and partnership opportunities
Students also expressed strong interest in transit connections between Fresno community colleges and Madera Community College. College representatives also noted that funding already exists to support students with gas cards or Uber assistance, and that there may be an opportunity to partner with the City on a transit pilot instead. • Service design and location-specific needs
Community Feedback
pg. 50
Questions were raised about possible service to locations such as the Casa Grande Motel, where residents need access to social and behavioral health services. Other questions focused on how on-demand service would operate in practice, including whether trips could include drive-thru access for riders with mobility needs, how fare levels might be affected by fleet type, and how DAR vehicles are typically utilized today.

Overall, the Phase 2 qualitative feedback reinforces the survey findings. Participants showed strong interest in more flexible and accessible transit options, but also emphasized that reliability, accessible technology, ADA service quality, and practical implementation details will be critical to the success of any new service model.

Best Practices
pg. 51
4 Best Practices
This section summarizes best practices for planning and implementing microtransit and ondemand services based on a national and regional industry scan of small-urban transit systems.

The findings are drawn from national studies, regional research, and peer agency case evaluations of on-demand and microtransit services across the United States, with a focus on communities comparable to Madera in size, density, and demographic profile. More detailed case studies and performance metrics are documented in Appendix B – Industry Scan.

Rather than recommending a single model, the industry scan highlights recurring themes related to service design, technology, governance, equity, and performance management. Together, these best practices provide a framework for evaluating which service concepts are most appropriate for Madera’s specific travel patterns, operational environment and community needs.

4.1 Service Design
Across peer systems, successful microtransit programs are designed around clearly defined service zones that reflect where and when demand exists. Zone-based, dynamically routed services consistently outperform corridor-based or route-deviation models in low-density environments, particularly where fixed-routes generate low ridership or require long, indirect travel paths.

Many agencies have deployed microtransit as:
• A replacement for underperforming fixed-routes,
• A complement to fixed-routes during off-peak periods, or • A coverage service in areas where fixed-route transit is not viable.

Programs that perform best establish clear operating parameters, including service hours, booking rules, and wait-time expectations, rather than attempting to replicate the flexibility of private ride-hailing services. Phased implementation is common, allowing agencies to test limited zones or trip types before expanding service geographically or temporally.

Why it Matters
Madera’s dispersed trip patterns, strong non-work travel demand, and lower-density residential areas mirror conditions where zone-based microtransit has proven effective. Best practices suggest that clearly bound service areas and targeted use of on-demand microtransit service can improve accessibility, cost-effectiveness and reliability without overextending resources.

Best Practices
pg. 52

4.2 Technology and Operations
Peer agencies consistently rely on robust technology platforms to manage on-demand services effectively. Dynamic dispatch software enables real-time routing, automated scheduling, and integrated performance dashboards, improving an agency’s ability to effectively manage demand fluctuations, monitor wait times and track productivity. Mobile applications are commonly paired with call-in booking options to ensure accessibility for riders without smartphones.

Agencies that integrate on-demand microtransit technology with existing systems, such as fixedroute scheduling, fare payment, or paratransit software, report improved operational efficiencies and customer experience. Performance dashboards and automated reporting tools are also widely used to track key indicators including trips per hour, cost per trip, and on-time performance.

Why it Matters
Madera Metro is already investing in new technology for both fixed-route and demand-response services. Best practices indicate that leveraging these platforms to support flexible service models, and to improve real-time information and ease of use, can directly address many of the informational and reliability barriers identified in the existing conditions analysis.

4.3 Equity and Accessibility
Equity considerations are central to a successful microtransit implementation. High-performing programs maintain multiple booking options, integrating mobile application booking with telephone and cash payment options to guarantee access for older adults, individuals with smartphones, and those with limited English proficiency. Many agencies use ADA-compliant vehicles and integrated microtransit and paratransit systems to improve efficiency while preserving required service quality for riders with disabilities and maintaining Title VI compliance.

Community engagement, including targeted outreach in multiple languages, and travel training are frequently cited as critical components, particularly in communities with large shares of lowincome households, seniors, or limited-English-proficiency residents.

Why it Matters
Madera’s demographic profile, including a high proportion of Hispanic/Latino residents, seniors, and lower-income households, closely aligns with communities where inclusive service design is essential. Best practices reinforce the need for services that are simple to understand, do not rely exclusively on smartphones, and are communicated clearly in Spanish and English.

Best Practices
pg. 53

4.4 Performance Measurement and Adaptation
Across the industry, microtransit is most successful when treated as an adaptive service, rather than a fixed solution. Agencies routinely adjust service zones, hours, and policies based on observed demand and performance data. Key metrics commonly tracked include cost per passenger, per vehicle hour, and shared ride data. These metrics are used to evaluate vendor performance and inform contract renewal, expansion, or termination decisions, effectively aligning technology partnerships with measurable service outcomes.

Programs that fail to meet performance expectations are often restructured, scaled back, or replaced, highlighting the importance of ongoing evaluation rather than long-term commitment to an underperforming model.

Why it Matters
Best practices emphasize that microtransit should be evaluated alongside fixed-route and DAR services using consistent metrics. This approach supports data-driven decisions about where flexible services add value and where traditional service remains more effective.

4.5 Key Takeaways
The industry scan demonstrated that microtransit can be a practical and scalable tool for smallurban transit systems when it is carefully designed, actively managed, and aligned with community needs. There is no single “right” model; instead, the most successful agencies tailor service design, technology, and governance to local conditions.

These best practices directly informed the development and evaluation of service design alternatives, helping to identify concepts that are operationally feasible, equitable, and responsive to Madera’s travel patterns, operational environment and community priorities.

Service Design Alternatives
pg. 54
5 Service Design Alternatives
Building from existing conditions assessment and best practices research, our next step in this process was to develop, test, and refine service design concepts that would address what the community and the data were illustrating. The intent of this exercise was not to prematurely select a preferred alternative, but rather to systematically narrow a broad universe of possible service concepts into a small set of feasible, high-performing options that warrant further evaluation and community discussion.

5.1 Methodology
The following section describes the methodology that was followed in creating and filtering scenarios for consideration.

5.1.1 Concept Generation and Initial Screening
Service design concepts were developed by synthesizing findings from the existing conditions analysis, community and stakeholder feedback, best practices research, and the project team’s experience with similar systems in small urban and rural contexts. Together, these inputs highlighted recurring themes—such as challenges with coverage, service frequency, span of service, and clarity of the network—that informed the types of service changes worth testing.

Rather than beginning with a single recommended approach, the study intentionally started with a wide range of conceptual ideas reflecting different strategic directions. These included variations of:
• Adjustments to the existing fixed-route network (e.g., simplifying routes, modifying service spans, or reallocating service hours),
• Expanded or targeted on-demand service models,
• Hybrid approaches that combine fixed-route service during certain times or in certain corridors with on-demand service elsewhere, and
• Flexible service concepts such as route deviation or zone-based services.

These initial concepts were screened qualitatively to ensure they were:
• Operationally plausible within Madera’s context,
• Consistent with funding and fleet constraints at a conceptual level, and • Responsive to clearly identified community needs and travel patterns.

Concepts that were clearly infeasible or misaligned with community priorities were not advanced to modeling, allowing the analysis to focus on realistic and policy-relevant options. Overall, 14 such feasible scenarios were developed.

Service Design Alternatives
pg. 55

5.1.2 Developing a Demand Model
Once the set of candidate concepts was established, the team used a demand model to understand how each concept might perform relative to existing service. The demand model was designed to estimate how riders are likely to respond to changes in service design, rather than to predict exact future ridership totals.

The model integrated:
• Demographic characteristics such as population density, income, age distribution, and vehicle ownership,
• Land use and trip generators including schools, healthcare facilities, retail, employment centers, and transit hubs,
• Observed ridership patterns from fixed-route and demand-response services, and • Service attributes such as travel time, wait time, service span, and geographic coverage.

Using these inputs, the model estimates changes in travel behavior across different service configurations, allowing the project team to compare scenarios on a consistent basis. Importantly, the model focuses on relative performance differences (for example, whether one concept is likely to generate more trips per service hour than another) rather than producing a single forecast.

5.1.3 Scenario Testing
Each service concept advanced to modeling is tested using a consistent set of assumptions and evaluation measures. This allows differences in outcomes to be attributed to service design choices rather than to changes in external assumptions.

Key metrics examined include:
• Estimated ridership and changes relative to the baseline, • Distribution of demand by time of day and trip purpose, • Revenue hours required to operate each concept, and
• Productivity indicators such as trips per revenue hour.

Where possible, scenarios were tested under similar overall budget or resource constraints to illustrate tradeoffs between coverage, frequency, and flexibility. This approach makes explicit the consequences of reallocating service hours—for example, shifting resources from low-performing fixed-route segments to on-demand service, or concentrating fixed-route service into fewer but more frequent corridors.

5.2 Initial Alternatives
After preliminary scenario development and testing, three alternatives emerged with strong characteristics in modeling projections. Each of these scenarios is discussed in more detail below.

Service Design Alternatives
pg. 56

5.2.1 Baseline
The baseline scenario reflects the current transit system in Madera, consisting of four fixed-routes operating alongside DAR and ADA/Paratransit service. More information on performance metrics in this scenario can be found in Section 2.3.1.1. This scenario serves as the reference point against which all other alternatives are evaluated.

It is important to note that this study’s outcomes do not support a continuation of current service structure due to the issues with cost, productivity, and ridership. On-demand ridership has been growing year-over-year, and fixed-route ridership has been relatively stable. Figure 5-1 provides a map of the baseline scenario.

Figure 5-1. Map of Baseline Scenario
Service Design Alternatives
pg. 57

5.2.2 Modified Fixed-Routes with On-Demand: Maximum Cost Efficiency (Option A)
Option A (as shown in Figure 5-2) represents a focused refinement of the existing fixed-route network while maintaining current DAR (rebranded to on-demand microtransit) and ADA/Paratransit services. Under this scenario, fixed-route service is streamlined to improve efficiency and productivity by simplifying route alignments, increasing directness, and concentrating service in corridors with the strongest existing demand. On-demand microtransit service focuses primarily on improved branding, alternative vehicle sizes, and improved appbased booking experiences rather than zone changes from current DAR service.

The fixed-route network is reduced to two core routes that prioritize service along Yosemite and Cleveland Avenues, where ridership demand is consistently highest. These routes would operate at 30-minute frequencies, improving upon the current 60-minute headways that exist on three of the four existing routes (with Route 1 already operating at 30-minute headways). This approach shifts fixed-route service toward fewer, stronger corridors while improving reliability and convenience for riders using those routes.

Lower-demand segments that are currently served by fixed-route buses under baseline conditions would instead be covered by on-demand microtransit service. Operating with the same service hours and response times as today, on-demand microtransit service would play a critical role in the overall network and is expected to absorb additional demand from riders who are better served through flexible, request-based trips. Microtransit ridership increases slightly and may increase even further with additional marketing and awareness of the new program.

The result of this scenario is a combined fixed-route and on-demand system that maintains ridership levels comparable to current conditions, but at a significantly reduced operating cost.

This scenario achieves meaningful cost savings while preserving access and mobility for riders.

While some areas would no longer receive fixed-route service, those trips would continue to be served by on-demand service, which provides reliable, high-quality service with average response times typically under 11 minutes.

Service Design Alternatives
pg. 58
Figure 5-2. Map of Option A - Fixed-Route Modified: Maximum Cost Efficiency Service Design Alternatives
pg. 59

5.2.3 Modified Fixed-Route with On-Demand: Maximum
Ridership (Option B)
Option B (as shown in Figure 5-3) explores a different reconfiguration of fixed-route service, placing a stronger emphasis on increasing ridership while keeping costs stable. This scenario further concentrates fixed-route service in the highest-performing corridors and makes more substantial changes to route structure with a greater emphasis on direct travel paths. On-demand microtransit is still deployed and, like scenario A, utilizes the same geographic bounds as DAR service while making changes to booking process, vehicle type, and new branding.

Relative to the baseline and Option A, this scenario offers improved fixed-route ridership and would not cut any fixed-route services. Rather, fixed-route service would be realigned in some places and added to in others to produce a network that better reflects current demand and growth in the future. Specifically, routes 1 and 4 are maintained in this scenario, but three new routes are introduced to bolster ridership to key destinations while keeping service efficient.

The key benefit of this approach is its potential to generate stronger ridership and a lower cost per passenger while building three new routes on top of two existing routes that perform well. In addition, on-demand services offer point-to-point service for passengers at the same service quality presented in Option A. On-demand microtransit may grow as adoption of application-based booking and knowledge of the service grows. This would continue to be a critical service that builds as some fixed-route service along Granada Drive is replaced with on-demand service because of low fixed-route demand along that corridor.

Service Design Alternatives
pg. 60
Figure 5-3. Map of Option B - Fixed-Route Modified: Maximum Ridership

5.2.4 On-Demand Microtransit Only (Option C)
The third scenario, Option C, (as seen in Figure 5-4) explored eliminates fixed-route service entirely and transitions the system to an on-demand–only model. Early in the evaluation, the study team considered dividing the City into smaller microtransit zones to limit vehicle circulation, which could improve response times and potentially reduce operating costs. However, because the existing Dial-a-Ride service already operates citywide, narrowing service areas was determined to carry risk; restricting zones could negatively affect rider perception and reduce ridership, particularly during the early stages of transition, when overall appetite for an on-demand–only system may still be developing.

Adoption of an on-demand–only service model is inherently uncertain, particularly in the absence of fixed-route service. To reflect this uncertainty, multiple ridership assumptions were tested, Service Design Alternatives
pg. 61
including scenarios in which on-demand service captures approximately 70 percent, 100 percent, and 150 percent of current fixed-route ridership. Across these scenarios, cost per trip is higher than under fixed-route service, and total ridership is somewhat lower in the near term. These results reflect the higher unit cost of providing door-to-door or curb-to-curb service and the challenges of achieving scale without sufficient demand density.

Despite these tradeoffs, the on-demand–only scenario represents the most forward-looking and growth-oriented approach considered. Recent trends in Madera indicate that demand-response ridership has grown more consistently than fixed-route ridership, and as fixed-route service continues to face productivity challenges, expanding flexible, on-demand options may better align with evolving travel behavior. Over time, this approach has the potential to attract new riders seeking more direct and convenient trips while also converting existing transit users to shorter, more efficient travel experiences.

Figure 5-4. Map of Option C – On-Demand Only
Service Design Alternatives
pg. 62

5.2.5 Additional Options
There are two other service changes the team explored that could be easily implemented in addition to any of the alternative scenarios described above. These are extended hours for ondemand service and Personal Mobility On-Demand Subsidies.

5.2.5.1 Extended On-Demand Service
The On-Demand Extended Service scenarios expand the availability of on-demand transit beyond the current service span, particularly into late-night periods when fixed-route service is limited or unavailable. Under this scenario, the structure of daytime service remains unchanged, but additional on-demand service is added to better align transit availability with community travel needs. This would be directly operated by the City’s contractor as with regular on-demand service.

Adding hours (weekend or late-night)
Compared to baseline conditions, this scenario directly addresses gaps that occur after the last fixed-route trips of the day. Rather than extending low-frequency or low-productivity fixed-routes into late hours, on-demand service is used as a more flexible and cost-efficient way to serve trips related to late-shift employment, school activities, shopping, medical needs, and social travel.

This approach recognizes that demand during evening hours is typically more dispersed and less predictable, making fixed-route service less effective. Table 5-1 provides a detailed breakdown of extended on-demand service projections.

The primary benefit of extending on-demand service hours is improved access and reliability during times when transit options are currently limited. Riders gain the ability to make trips later in the evening without needing to plan around early service cutoffs, and the City can respond more effectively to non-traditional work schedules and evolving travel patterns. Because service is demand-responsive, vehicles are only deployed when trips are requested, helping to control operating costs.

Table 5-1. Initial Extended On-Demand Service Projections

SCENARIO VEHICLES REVENUE
HOURS

ADDITIONAL

PASSENGE
RS
COST $ PER TRIP
1 hour extension 1 247 741 $29,020 $39
4-hour extension 1 617.5 988 $72,550 $73
Potential drawbacks include increased operating expenses associated with longer service days and the possibility of lower utilization during late-night period or weekends. Careful monitoring would be needed to ensure that extended hours are appropriately scaled to demand. In some respects, starting with a subsidized personal mobility on-demand service (discussed below) may Service Design Alternatives
pg. 63
be a precursor to expanding on-demand service, until demand adequately brings costs per trip down into the range of $20/trip or less.

5.2.5.2 Personal Mobility On-Demand Subsidies (PMOD)
The PMOD service scenario explores the use of third-party, app-based ride-hailing providers, also known as Transportation Networking Companies or TNCs (such as Uber or Lyft) to supplement Madera’s existing transit services in a targeted and cost-controlled way. Rather than operating new fixed-routes or expanding City-run on-demand service into areas with low or uncertain demand, this approach allows the City to purchase trips on demand from private providers for a limited number of riders or trip types.

Under this scenario, Madera would identify specific trips, trip types, or service windows where using a third-party provider could improve reliability, fill service gaps, or test new markets. These trips would be subsidized by the City and made available to eligible riders through a defined program, rather than being open-ended or systemwide.

This approach differs from the baseline in that it does not expand City-operated service. Instead, it adds flexibility by allowing the City to “buy mobility as needed,” particularly where operating a bus or city-run on-demand vehicle would be inefficient or cost-prohibitive.

How the PMOD Model Works
PMOD programs typically operate through a competitive procurement or bidding process. The City would issue a request for proposals to qualified ride hailing providers outlining key program parameters, such as eligible trip types or destinations, service hours, maximum subsidy per trip or per rider, fare structure for riders, and reporting and data-sharing requirements.

For example, the City might solicit bids from Uber and Lyft to provide up to X number of subsidized trips per day for a defined set of trips, such as late-running connections, medical appointments, or regional trips. Providers would submit pricing based on a per-trip or per-mile basis, and the City would select one or more providers based on cost, coverage, reliability, and data transparency.

Once implemented, eligible riders would request trips either directly through the participating ride hailing provider’s app or through a designated booking interface, which could include integration within the City’s on-demand or microtransit platform (such as Spare), allowing riders to access PMOD trips alongside other transit services. The City would subsidize a portion of the fare, and the rider would pay the remaining amount, if any. The City’s financial exposure would be capped by the number of trips or total subsidy authorized under the program.

Pros and Cons of the PMOD Approach
This approach offers high flexibility and scalability. PMOD allows the City to test new service concepts without committing to full-time service or purchasing additional vehicles. It can improve reliability for specific trips, reduce missed connections, and provide service in areas or time Service Design Alternatives
pg. 64
periods where traditional transit performs poorly. Costs can be tightly controlled through caps on trips or subsidies.

Potential drawbacks include reliance on third-party providers and equity considerations related to smartphone access or familiarity with ride-hailing platforms. Careful program design would be needed to ensure access for riders without smartphones and to avoid undermining existing transit services. Because per-trip costs are higher than fixed-route service, PMOD is best suited for targeted, limited-use applications rather than broad systemwide coverage.

Fare Considerations and Policy Flexibility
Fares under a PMOD-based Fresno connector do not need to mirror fares for fixed-route or Cityoperated on-demand service. Even with a higher rider fare for out-of-town trips, the service would likely remain heavily subsidized compared to the typical market cost of a rideshare trip between Madera and Fresno. This flexibility allows the City to balance affordability with cost recovery and to differentiate regional or premium services from local transit. Fare levels, eligibility criteria, and subsidy amounts will continue to be explored further through stakeholder discussions and policy review prior to implementation.

Possible Applications
Application of PMOD for Fresno Connector Service
One potential application of the PMOD model is to provide limited, subsidized connections between Madera and Fresno. Current demand modeling suggests that operating a fixed-route or City-run on-demand zone extending into Fresno would likely be expensive relative to anticipated ridership, particularly in the near term. However, there is clear demand for occasional regional trips, especially for medical appointments, shopping, and specialized services that are not available in Madera.

Rather than committing to a service extension, the City could pilot a PMOD-based Fresno connector. Under this approach, Madera residents would be eligible for subsidized ride hailing trips to specific destinations in Fresno and back. A potential destination is El Paseo, a shopping center near the northern edge of Fresno with relatively direct access via the Golden State Highway and convenient connections to Fresno’s fixed-route transit network. Another potential destination is the River Park area. River Park is a particularly strategic destination, as it includes major retail, multiple healthcare facilities such as Kaiser Permanente and Fresno Heart and Surgical Hospital, and equally convenient connections to Fresno’s fixed-route transit network as El Paseo.

This model would allow the City to meet regional mobility needs while limiting financial risk. Trips could be capped per day or per month, restricted to certain purposes, or limited to specific rider groups. Data from the pilot could then be used to assess whether demand is strong enough to justify a more permanent service in the future.

Potential Use for School and Student Trips
PMOD service could also be used to supplement on-demand capacity for school-related trips if demand exceeds available vehicles or if specific trip patterns emerge that are difficult to serve Service Design Alternatives
pg. 65
efficiently with City-operated service. This could include overflow demand during peak school travel windows or specialized trips requested by students. Additional clarity on this potential application will be informed by upcoming engagement with Madera Unified School District and Madera Community College.

Augmenting On-Demand Service
PMOD service could also be used as a targeted tool to augment City-operated on-demand service during periods of high demand or limited availability. When microtransit response times increase due to peak usage, vehicle constraints, or staffing limitations, PMOD trips could be deployed selectively to absorb overflow demand and maintain acceptable wait times for riders. This approach allows the City to preserve service quality without permanently expanding fleet size or operating hours. Similarly, PMOD could be used to extend service into late-night hours when operating City-run vehicles may be cost-prohibitive. By subsidizing a limited number of late-night trips through a third-party provider, the City could address unmet mobility needs related to late shifts, social trips, or emergencies while maintaining tight control over costs and program scope.

Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 66
6 Evaluation and Recommendations
After discussing the leading alternatives with City staff, completing another round of public engagement, and refining our modeling and route construction, the team consolidated recommendations into a single feasible approach for moving forward, and developed an evaluation framework that addresses implementation considerations and associated risks. This recommendation is outlined below. Figure 6-1 through Figure 6-3 provide map-based visualizations of the recommended approach.

6.1 Recommended Approach
Figure 6-1. Recommended Approach
After careful analysis of the leading alternatives and incorporating feedback from the community as well as City staff, our team is proposing a hybrid approach. From Section 5, this approach Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 67
most closely resembles option A, but with some minor improvements (such as extending Route 1 to the hospital, recoloring routes to match current routes, and better defining brokered services.) This proposed system would maintain essential fixed-routes with higher demand and improve those fixed-routes in terms of their structure and headways, while also rolling out on demand microtransit service and introducing complementary personal mobility on-demand enhancements.

In so doing, the City will have the opportunity to combine the most reliable and efficient elements of fixed-route service while introducing more modern and scalable mobility options, without sacrificing coverage or increasing the overall budget. The result would be a more reliable and accessible transit network.

Figure 6-2. Recommended Approach - Including Entire Service Area The recommendation is to convert Dial-A-Ride service to a modernized microtransit service with expanded hours, improved customer experience, and enhanced connectivity to key destinations, including select locations in Fresno. Then, we suggest modifying the Purple and Orange lines to be more linear and operate with more consistent 30-minute headways. Lower performing routes and route-segments would then be eliminated, with service in those areas being provided through microtransit. All of these changes together are projected to increase ridership while reducing Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 68
overall system costs. The proposed alternative is summarized on the maps below. Note that in the initial term, it is recommended that later evening hours and earlier mornings as well as Fresno connector service are brokered to TNCs (like Uber and Lyft), at least until demand justifies a more regular shuttle or City-operated service.

Figure 6-3. Recommended Approach (Zoomed Out)
Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 69
Specific proposed changes to the fixed-route and on-demand services as proposed in this scenario are outlined via Table 6-1 and Table 6-2 below.

Table 6-1. Proposed Changes to Fixed-Route Services

SERVICE ASPECT BASELINE (DIAL-A-RIDE) PROPOSED (MICROTRANSIT) CHANGE Vehicle & Booking Traditional vehicles Phone-based
booking
Modern fleet, emphasis on app-first
booking (phone still available)
✓ Real-time tracking
✓ Improved customer
experience
✓ Stronger system
branding
Operating Hours Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm Saturday:
9am–4pm Sunday: 8:30am–2:30pm
Weekdays: same Saturday: 9am–
6:30pm (+2.5 hrs)
Sunday: same
✓ Expanded weekend
service hours
✓ Better alignment with
community travel needs
Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 71

SERVICE ASPECT BASELINE (DIAL-A-RIDE) PROPOSED (MICROTRANSIT) CHANGE Annual Operating Cost $1,757,340 $2,327,940
+$570,600 (expanded
service, improved fleet)
(Note: Costs may
decrease through
competitive
procurement; we
assumed current cost
per hour which is high
relative to industry
benchmarks)
Projected Annual Ridership 21,500–32,200 32,300–47,900 +10,800–15,700 riders Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 72
Table 6-3 provides a breakdown of recommended changes to shoulder hour PMOD & Fresno Connector.

Table 6-3. Recommended Changes to Shoulder Hour PMOD & Fresno Connector

SERVICE DESCRIPTION & MODEL OPERATING HOURS COST &

RIDERSHIP
Shoulder Hour PMOD (Madera)
-City-subsidized shared-ride PMOD trips
(Uber/Lyft) to fill early morning and evening
gaps
-Pay-per-trip model
Weekdays: 6–7am, 6:30–
8pm
Saturday: 6:30–8pm
Cost:
~$3,750/yr
Riders: 250–
1,300
Fresno Connector
-On-demand service connecting Madera to
Fresno
-Can transition to scheduled shuttle if
demand grows, with minimal cost increase
while maintaining coverage
-Evaluates long-term regional connectivity
demand
Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm
Cost:
~$34,500/yr
Riders: 1,200–
3,500
Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 73

6.2 Summary and Projected Impacts
The recommended approach results in measurable changes to system performance, cost, and service delivery. Summary and key projected impacts are summarized in Table 6-4 below.

Table 6-4. Summary of Proposed Scenarios and Projected Impacts

METRIC BASELINE SCENARIO PROPOSED SCENARIO CHANGE
Estimated Annual
Ridership 86,100 – 108,300 86,300 – 121,600 +300 to +13,300 riders Total Annual
Operating Cost ~$4,095,270 ~$4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%) Cost Per Trip $38 $33 -$5 per trip (↓ 13%)
Number of FixedRoutes 4 routes 2 routes
Strategic
consolidation to core
corridors
On-Demand Service
Type Traditional Dial-A-Ride On-demand microtransit
Modernized service
delivery and
customer
experience,
expanded hours
Supplemental OnDemand Services None
Subsidized shared-ride
Uber/Lyft trips during
shoulder hours and to
Fresno
Expanded hours;
improved access to
Fresno medical
appointments and
college classes
A cost summary by route/service can be found in Table 6-5.

Table 6-5. Summary of Route by Service

SERVICE BASELINE COST PROPOSED COST DIFFERENCE
Dial-A-Ride /
Microtransit $1,757,340 $2,327,940 +$570,600
Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 74

SERVICE BASELINE COST PROPOSED COST DIFFERENCE
Route 1 (Purple) $726,390 $828,576 +$102,186
Route 2 (Orange) $726,390 $828,576 +$102,186
Route 3 (Green) $647,010 $0 -$647,010
Route 4 (Blue) $238,140 $0 -$238,140
Shoulder Hour PMOD $0 $3,750 +$3,750
Fresno Connector $0 $34,500 +$34,500
TOTAL SYSTEM $4,095,270 $4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%)
Overall, the recommended service approach maintains the core elements of the existing system while introducing targeted improvements to better meet community needs. Fixed-route service continues along key corridors and to critical destinations, ensuring stability and continuity for current riders, while ADA accessibility remains a central priority. At the same time, the system is restructured to provide more direct trips, shorter wait times, and expanded service hours. The addition of microtransit provides flexible, citywide coverage that complements fixed-routes and improves overall convenience. New pilot programs, including early morning and evening service and potential regional connections, allow the City to test and refine service enhancements before broader implementation.

Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 75

6.2.1 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Reduction and Cost
Effectiveness
VMT Reduction Analysis
The proposed transit improvements are expected to generate measurable reductions in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) by shifting trips from private automobiles to transit services. Based on projected increases in annual ridership (and reflecting a phased approach for deployment), from approximately 300 to 13,300 additional riders annually, VMT reductions were estimated using standard planning assumptions for mode shift and trip length.

Applying a range of reasonable assumptions (50 - 70% auto diversion and 5 - 7 miles per trip), the proposed service plan is estimated to reduce approximately:
750 to 65,000 VMT annually
This range reflects uncertainty in rider behavior and trip characteristics but demonstrates that the proposed improvements, particularly expanded microtransit service (both locally and connectivity to Fresno), have the potential to meaningfully reduce reliance on private vehicles. The majority of VMT reduction is driven by increased ridership associated with the enhanced on-demand microtransit service, which provides greater coverage, flexibility, and accessibility.

It is important to note that these estimates represent gross VMT reduction. A more detailed analysis would account for additional transit vehicle miles associated with expanded service hours and operations to determine net VMT reductions.

Cost Analysis
The proposed service plan results in a net reduction in total annual operating cost, decreasing from approximately $4.10 million to $4.02 million, representing a savings of approximately $71,928 (1.8%) annually.

This cost reduction is achieved through:
• Consolidation of underperforming fixed-routes
• Reallocation of resources to higher-demand corridors
• Strategic use of microtransit and targeted on-demand services Despite increased investment in microtransit service, overall system efficiency improves, resulting in lower total cost and reduced cost per trip (from $38 to $33).

Cost Effectiveness (Cost per VMT Reduced)
Cost effectiveness was evaluated by comparing annual system costs to estimated VMT reductions.

Evaluation and Final Recommendations
pg. 76
Incremental Cost Effectiveness
Because the proposed scenario reduces total operating cost relative to the baseline, the project achieves VMT reductions at a net cost savings, resulting in:
-$1 to -$100 per VMT reduced
This indicates that the project not only reduces VMT but does so while lowering overall system costs, representing a highly favorable outcome.

Total Cost Perspective
When evaluated using total system cost, the cost per VMT reduced ranges from approximately:
$60 to $5,400 per VMT reduced
This wide range reflects uncertainty in VMT reduction assumptions and highlights the importance of using incremental cost measures for evaluating project efficiency.

Key Findings
• The proposed service plan achieves both VMT reduction and cost savings, an uncommon and highly favorable outcome.
• Expanded microtransit service is the primary driver of new ridership and associated VMT reduction.
• System restructuring improves efficiency by reallocating resources from low-performing routes to higher-demand services.
• Cost-effectiveness improves significantly when evaluated on an incremental basis, demonstrating that the proposed plan delivers environmental benefits without increasing operating costs.

Conclusion
The proposed transit improvements represent a cost-effective strategy for reducing VMT and improving system performance. By increasing ridership, enhancing service flexibility, and optimizing resource allocation, the plan reduces dependence on private vehicle travel while simultaneously lowering operating costs. These outcomes support broader goals related to sustainability, equity, and efficient service delivery, and position the Madera project favorably for competitive funding opportunities.

A Way Forward
pg. 77
7 A Way Forward
This section outlines how the City can start implementing and later evaluating these changes to Madera Metro.

7.1 Funding Strategies
The City of Madera is positioned to implement service improvement strategies and expand its public transportation system through a layered funding strategy combining federal, state, regional, and local funding sources. This section provides a primer on funding opportunities for Madera Metro fixed-route transit, DAR, and proposed on-demand microtransit service.

There is no single “microtransit grant.” Instead, successful implementation depends on aligning multiple funding programs with policy priorities such as equity, air quality, safety, and regional connectivity.

Funding for an on-demand microtransit service will require a layered and strategic approach that aligns with how transportation funding is awarded in California and federally. Rather than relying on a single grant, the City should combine multiple funding sources and position microtransit as a solution to broader policy goals. Section 7.2 presents an overview of Funding Programs.

7.1.1 Use Existing Transit Funds as the Foundation
Madera already receives funding through programs such as Federal Transit Administration (FTA) Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants and TDA revenues. These sources should serve as the baseline funding for implementing microtransit.

The City can:
• Reallocate resources from underperforming fixed-routes • Integrate microtransit into existing Dial-A-Ride operations • Use 5307 funds for eligible operating, planning, and capital costs This approach allows Madera to launch service without waiting for new grant awards.

7.1.2 Leverage Air Quality Funding (High Priority)
Because Madera is located in the San Joaquin Valley air basin, it is eligible for strong air quality funding opportunities. The most important is the Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Improvement Program (CMAQ), which can fund:

A Way Forward
pg. 78
• New transit services (including microtransit)
• Operating costs for the first 2–3 years
• Projects that reduce Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) and emissions Additionally, California’s Low Carbon Transit Operations Program (LCTOP) can support:
• On-demand transit service
• Fare subsidies
• Zero-emission vehicle deployment
For Madera, framing microtransit as an emissions-reduction strategy is critical to unlocking these funds.

7.1.3 Position Microtransit as an Equity Investment
Many state and federal programs prioritize Disadvantaged Communities (DACs) and mobility equity. Madera can strengthen funding applications by demonstrating that microtransit:
• Serves low-income neighborhoods
• Supports zero-vehicle households
• Improves access to jobs, healthcare, and education
• Enhances mobility for seniors and individuals with disabilities Equity-focused positioning is especially important for programs like LCTOP and TIRCP.

7.1.4 Coordinate with Regional Partners
Funding in California is often controlled or influenced by regional agencies such as the San Joaquin Valley Council of Governments and Fresno Council of Governments (COGs). To maximize funding opportunities, Madera should:
• Align the microtransit project with regional transportation plans • Coordinate applications and programming with the San Joaquin Valley COG and/or Fresno COG
• Position the service as improving regional connectivity between Madera and Fresno
Regional coordination is essential for accessing programs like CMAQ and Senate Bill 125 (SB 125) transit funding.

A Way Forward
pg. 79

7.1.5 Start with a Pilot Program
A phased pilot approach is the most realistic path forward.

An eighteen-to-twenty-four-month microtransit pilot allows the City to:
• Use short-term funding sources (CMAQ, LCTOP, grants)
• Test service design and demand
• Collect performance data (ridership, cost per trip, emissions reduction) Pilot results can then support future funding applications and long-term adoption.

7.1.6 Combine Public Funding with Local and Institutional Support
In addition to grants, Madera can strengthen its funding strategy by leveraging local contributions.

Potential sources include:
• Local general fund or transportation allocations
• Partnerships with major employers (for workforce access) • Healthcare providers (for patient transportation)
• Educational institutions (MUSD and/or MCC)
These partnerships can help fund specific service zones or rider groups, reducing the burden on public funding.

7.1.7 Align the Project with Specific Use Cases
Microtransit is most competitive for funding when tied to clearly defined goals.

For Madera, the strongest use cases, as reflected in outcomes from the feasibility study, include:
• City-wide microtransit deployment
• Replacing low-ridership fixed-routes
• Improving access to Fresno education and medical centers • Enhancing Dial-A-Ride efficiency
Clearly defining the purpose of the service makes it easier to match with funding programs.

A Way Forward
pg. 80

7.1.8 Plan for Long-Term Sustainability
A common challenge is sustaining service after initial funding expires.

To address this, Madera should:
• Identify long-term funding sources early (e.g., 5307, TDA, SB 125) • Design the pilot with scalability in mind
• Transition from grant-funded operations to stable funding streams Building a long-term funding plan from the outset ensures that successful pilot programs can continue beyond initial grant cycles.

7.1.9 Key Takeaways
The most effective funding strategy for microtransit in Madera is to:
• Start with existing funding (5307, TDA)
• Launch using CMAQ and LCTOP
• Coordinate regionally (Fresno COG, SB 125)
• Scale with TIRCP and federal fleet programs
Success will depend less on finding new funding sources and more on strategically aligning microtransit with air quality, equity, and regional mobility goals.

7.2 Overview of Funding Programs

7.2.1 Federal Programs
• FTA Section 5307 Urbanized Area Formula Grants – core funding for operations, planning, and capital
• FTA Section 5339 Bus and Bus Facilities Program – funding for vehicles and facilities • CMAQ – supports projects that reduce emissions and traffic congestion • Safe Streets and Roads for All (SS4A) – safety-focused planning and implementation funding
• Accelerating Innovative Mobility (AIM) – supports innovative transit pilots • Buses and Bus Facilities / Low or No Emission Vehicle Program (Bus/Low-No) – supports fleet electrification
A Way Forward
pg. 81

7.2.2 State Programs
• LCTOP – funds low-emission transit operations
• Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP) – large-scale capital investments • Senate Bill 125 Transit Funding (SB 125) – flexible regional transit support • Senate Bill 1 State of Good Repair Program (SB1 SGR) – maintenance and rehabilitation funding

7.2.3 Regional/Local
• TDA - primary local transit funding
• State Transit Assistance (STA) – formula-based state support • San Joaquin Valley Council of Governments (COG) – regional agency allocating funding

7.3 Phased Implementation
Implementation of the recommended service concept should follow a phased approach that allows the City to manage risk, maintain service continuity, and refine key operational details prior to full system transition. Figure 7-1 provides a visual summary of the phased implementation approach.

7.3.1 Phase 1: Transition to On-Demand Microtransit
The first phase focuses on transitioning the existing Dial-A-Ride service to a modernized ondemand microtransit model. This component can be implemented relatively quickly and provides immediate benefits in terms of customer experience, flexibility, and expanded service availability.

Initial steps include:
• Development of a Request for Proposals (RFP) for microtransit service delivery and technology
• Procurement and vendor selection
• Service planning and configuration, including service zones, hours, and policies • Implementation of the new microtransit service
A competitive RFP process for on-demand microtransit service could take 3-6 months from notice to proceed to having the vendor onboard, depending on requirements. Implementation is expected to take approximately 12 weeks following contract award.

Launching microtransit first allows the City to expand flexible service capacity early, which will be important for supporting later system changes.

A Way Forward
pg. 82

7.3.2 Phase 2: Fixed-Route Refinement and Public
Communication
While the microtransit procurement and implementation are underway, the City can advance detailed refinement of fixed-route elements alongside a coordinated public communication effort.

This phase includes:
• Stop spacing analysis
• Evaluation of stop infrastructure needs (including shelters, signage, amenities), as well as identification of stops to be relocated or eliminated, which may require infrastructure changes
• Development of updated schedules and timetables
• Fare policy analysis
• Preparation and rollout of clear communication materials explaining upcoming service changes
• Outreach through community channels, including schools, employers, and local organizations
• Rider education on how to use updated services and new tools Conducting refinement and communication concurrently ensures that service details are welldefined and that the public is informed well in advance of implementation. Overall this phase would be expected to take about 6 months.

7.3.3 Phase 3: Fixed-Route Service Implementation
The final phase involves implementation of the revised fixed-route network.

This includes:
• Launch of streamlined fixed-route services focused on core corridors • Transition from existing routes to the updated network • Initial monitoring of system performance using established KPIs and adjustments as needed
Targeting to have this implementation ready prior to the next operator contract allows sufficient time for planning, outreach, and coordination, while ensuring that the microtransit system is fully operational prior to fixed-route changes. This phase would not take long to put into effect after the conclusion of phase 2, but staff should allocate time over the first month of the implementation to conduct ongoing outreach, troubleshooting, and budget reviews.

A Way Forward
pg. 83
Figure 7-1. Phased Implementation Approach
A Way Forward
pg. 84

7.3.4 Ongoing Monitoring and Adjustment
Following implementation, the City should continue to monitor performance across services. Key metrics such as ridership, cost per trip, wait times, and customer experience should be tracked to inform ongoing refinements.

This phased approach allows the City to introduce improvements in a controlled and strategic manner, reducing implementation risk while delivering early benefits to residents.

7.4 KPI Framework
Several Key Performance Indicators (KPIs) will be helpful as the City continually evaluates the success of the on-demand microtransit services. Many of these are familiar measurements when compared to fixed-route KPIs, but targets may differ.

It is important to note that the first several months of a microtransit program are focused on marketing and increasing adoption. It is not advised to evaluate the service against the metrics in this document until the year 1 mark. After 6 months, the City may consider using 80% of the target values listed as a quick check to see if things are on the right track. Continuous refinement with any microtransit vendor is advised in order to achieve best results. Table 7-1 provides the KPIs for on-demand microtransit service.

A Way Forward
pg. 85
Table 7-1. On-Demand Microtransit Service KPIs
Business
Function KPI Target
Mobility / Service
O&M
Agency-operated microtransit
productivity 2.5-4.0 completed passenger trips per revenue vehicle hour Demand fulfillment rate >=90% for agency-operated microtransit trips; >=95% for brokered TNC trips Average passenger wait time <=15 minutes average for trips within Madera; 90th percentile <=25 minutes On-time pickup performance >=90% of trips picked up within the promised pickup window Overall trip time objective
Average completed local trip time (pickup to drop-off) <=30 minutes within Madera; >=90% of Fresno connector trips arrive within 15 minutes of the requested arrival window
SaaS platform availability >=99.9% monthly uptime for the on-demand booking and dispatch platform Shared-ride rate >=25% of completed agency-operated trips shared with another passenger Equity
Equivalent service quality by
district
Average wait time in each council district should be no worse than 10% above the systemwide average
Non-digital booking parity 100% of pilot trips bookable by phone; phone-booked trip fulfillment rate >=90% and average call wait times <5 minutes
Language access coverage 100% of rider-facing materials, booking channels, and customer support available in English and Spanish
Accessible trip availability 100% of eligible WAV and ADA-compliant requests accommodated on service days Payment inclusion No surcharge for phone booking or cash-equivalent payment options; riders must be able to access service without requiring a smartphone or bank card A Way Forward
pg. 86
Business
Function KPI Target
Customer
Satisfaction
Overall rider satisfaction >=4.5 out of 5 average across all trips Satisfied / very satisfied after
one year
>=85% of surveyed riders report being satisfied or very satisfied after one year of service
Complaint rate <=5 complaints per 1,000 trips; safety and security complaints <=1 per 1,000 trips Repeat-use rate By month 12, >=50% of monthly riders take 2 or more trips per month Finance
Net cost per completed
microtransit trip <=$50 average
Average subsidy per
brokered trip Within Madera: <=$15 per trip; Fresno connector service: <=$30 per trip Budget adherence Monthly pilot operating spend remains within +/-10% of the adopted budget unless an approved service change is made
Brokerage utilization cap Brokered trips should remain <=10% of standard microtransit trips Environmental
Net VMT reduction Pilot should achieve >=10% lower net passenger VMT per completed trip than the baseline solo-auto or solo-TNC alternative
Deadhead share <=35% of total vehicle miles
Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 87
8 Marketing, Branding, and
Communications Strategy
The transition to a modernized transit system in Madera, including the introduction of microtransit, expansion of on-demand mobility, and modifications to the fixed-route network, represents a significant change in how residents will access and understand local transportation. This shift requires a coordinated marketing, branding, and communications effort to ensure that new services are clearly understood, widely adopted, and trusted by the community.

Community engagement conducted as part of this study indicates that riders are seeking clearer information, improved ease of use, and better awareness of available services. Feedback also suggests that many residents rely on personal networks, social media, and community-based institutions as their primary sources of information. In addition, prior outreach efforts have emphasized the need for multilingual materials and engagement strategies that reach both riders and non-riders across the city.

Given these findings, the following strategy focuses on positioning the new system as easy to use, visible within the community, and aligned with how residents already access information.

8.1 Guiding Principles
The recommended approach is based on six key principles that should guide all marketing, branding, and outreach activities.
• Transit should be presented as modern and relevant. On-demand microtransit should be positioned as convenient, technology-enabled mobility option that provide a viable alternative to driving.
• Outreach should occur where people already are. This includes both physical locations such as retail centers and community spaces, as well as digital platforms that residents use regularly.
• The strategy should leverage word-of-mouth communication. Information shared through trusted personal networks is often more influential than formal messaging, and outreach efforts should be designed to support and amplify this dynamic. • Messaging should be simple and focused. Communications should clearly explain what the service is, how to use it, and why it benefits the user. • All materials and engagement should be accessible and culturally responsive. Bilingual materials and outreach through trusted community channels are essential given Madera’s demographics.
• The system should be presented as a single, coordinated network. Messaging should clearly explain how fixed-route, on-demand, and regional connection services work together, rather than treating them as separate services.

Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 88

8.2 Branding Strategy

8.2.1 Microtransit Service Identity
A distinct identity should be developed for microtransit services to differentiate them from traditional fixed-route transit and to emphasize flexibility and ease of use.

Effective naming conventions observed in peer systems are short, intuitive, and easy to remember. Potential examples include Madera Go, Vamos, or Ride Madera. These types of names communicate movement and accessibility without requiring explanation.

The service should be positioned in simple terms as a flexible ride option that can be requested when needed, rather than as a traditional transit service with fixed schedules. While microtransit should have a distinct identity, it should be framed as one component of a broader system that includes fixed-route service and regional connections.

8.2.2 Vehicle Design and Visual Identity
Vehicle design plays an important role in communicating the new service. Microtransit vehicles should have a distinct visual identity that sets them apart from fixed-route buses. This can be achieved through the use of modern wraps, simplified graphics, and clear messaging about how the service works.

Smaller vehicles should be used where feasible, as they reinforce the perception of flexibility and responsiveness. Exterior messaging should include concise instructions and visual cues, such as references to app-based booking and QR codes that link directly to service information.

Vehicles will serve as highly visible, mobile marketing tools throughout the community.

8.2.3 System Branding Integration
While microtransit should have its own identity, it should remain clearly connected to Madera Metro services. This can be achieved through a unified logo system, consistent color hierarchies, and a simple system map that illustrates how fixed-route and on-demand microtransit work together.

Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 89

8.3 Marketing Strategy

8.3.1 Traditional Media
Consider paid coverage on Spanish-language radio and TV serving the Fresno–Madera market (e.g. Radio Bilingüe, Radio Campesina, Univision/Telemundo affiliates). For English market, the Madera Tribune and ABC-30 midday local shows would be appropriate channels.

8.3.2 Social Media
A strong social media presence should be central to the marketing effort. Platforms such as Facebook and Instagram are particularly important for reaching a broad cross-section of Madera residents.

Content should focus on practical, easy-to-understand information. This includes short videos demonstrating how to book a ride, explanations of when to use different services, and testimonials from local riders. Visual and video-based content will be more effective than text-heavy materials.

The goal is to create content that residents are willing to share within their own networks, extending the reach of the campaign organically.

Consider running paid seasonal social media campaigns for times of specific need (1 week at a time oriented around projected heat warnings, high smoke days, holiday shopping periods, etc.), positioning on-demand microtransit as a comfortable, convenient alternative.

8.3.3 Word-of-Mouth and Ambassador Programs
To support informal information sharing, the City should consider establishing a transit ambassador program. This program can include students, community leaders, community-based organizations, healthcare workers, and frequent riders who are trained to explain how the service works and encourage others to try it.

Ambassadors can play a role in both in-person outreach and online engagement. Providing small incentives or recognition can help sustain participation over time. Ambassadors should be trained to deliver lessons/information about the service, direct potential riders to information, and get them ready to ride. This type of federalized travel training model will be critical in making people aware of the transit options.

Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 90

8.3.4 Incentive-Based Adoption
An initial free ride period of approximately 60-180 days is recommended to reduce barriers to trying the new on-demand microtransit service.

Following this period, referral programs should be introduced and maintained on an ongoing basis. These programs can provide incentives for existing users to invite others to try the service, helping to sustain growth beyond the initial launch. In addition, ongoing incentive programs can be explored as one-off exercises to continue inducing demand – for example, “Families Ride Free this Saturday”, “3-rides free if you register by XXX date”.

Partnerships with local businesses should also be explored as a longer-term strategy. For example, riders could receive discounts or promotions at participating businesses, reinforcing the connection between transit use and local economic activity.

Consider a “rider of the month” campaign with and provide ride credits to “winners” that allow the City to profile them and do a human-interest story online/social media explaining what the service means to them. The goal is to humanize the service and let people know how valuable transit services can be.

8.3.5 Targeted Outreach and Community Partnerships
Outreach efforts should be tailored to specific groups and locations within Madera, using the stakeholder database developed as part of this project as a starting point. Outreach efforts should not only introduce new services but also explain how existing services are changing. Many riders will be most affected by adjustments to fixed-route service, including route consolidation and changes in frequency. Clear, location-specific communication will be critical to ensure that existing riders understand how their trips may change and what alternatives are available.

Key audiences and outreach approaches include:

Students
• Continue coordination with Madera Unified School District and Madera Community College.
o Integrate how-to-ride materials into school registration days and campus orientations
o Coordinate with school administrators and school district officials to ensure information is posted in newsletters, hallways, and any other applicable school channels like Parent Square.
o Offer hands-on tutorials at schools as needed to ensure students know how to use the services available to them.

Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 91
o Consider offering student ambassador challenges with rewards for sign-ups Seniors
• Focus on senior centers and programs serving older adults. Messaging should emphasize ease of use, safety, and the availability of phone-based booking. Coordination with staff at these facilities will be important for building trust and awareness. • Have drop-in sessions to promote the service and have tablets on hand so people can register and practice booking a trip
Community locations and high-activity destinations
• Conduct outreach at locations where residents already gather, including:
o Madera Flea Market
o Walgreens
o Grocery stores such as El Toro and other neighborhood markets o Community events like Madera Fair and Pomegranate Festival Faith-based organizations and non-profits
• Provide bulletin inserts and after-service demos at churches (including Spanish-language) and other faith centers

8.4 Communication Materials
Communications should focus heavily on explaining how to use the system. A dedicated effort should be made to provide clear, step-by-step guidance on booking trips, understanding service options, and navigating the system.

Materials should be available in multiple formats, including:
• Flyers/Posters
o Consider having flyers on vehicles, at community events, and also around town at major destinations (laundromats, grocery stores, pharmacies, panaderias, libraries, senior centers, healthcare centers, etc.). Flyers at key destinations might say “How to get here with Madera Metro” with a QR code to the website that explains services
• Printed handouts/mailouts
o Consider door hangers/postcards mailed directly to residents, particularly neighborhoods where fixed-route service is being removed to ensure they are aware of the on-demand service.

Marketing, Branding, and Communications Strategy
pg. 92
• Traditional media advertisements
• Short videos and social media content
• Mobile-friendly digital materials (for pushing emails to on-demand users and stakeholder groups)
o These digital materials, including route maps, should be posted in accessible formats in multiple languages, and made available to the City in editable formats so that future changes can be made easily.
• Updated webpages
o Important note: both City and County webpages should be accurate and consistent. Current search results prioritize the County webpage over the City's in several common queries.

Visual elements such as icons and diagrams should be used to reduce reliance on text and improve clarity. Pictograms for low-literacy users, ensuring large print and high contrast, will be most useful.

All materials should be provided in both English and Spanish, and messaging should be tested to ensure clarity across different user groups.

In addition to promoting new services, communication materials must clearly explain the changes to the existing system. This includes:
• The transition from four fixed-routes to a smaller number of more frequent routes • The role of on-demand service in providing coverage and extending service hours • The availability of new or expanded connections, including potential service to Fresno Messaging should emphasize the benefits of these changes, including improved frequency on core corridors, more flexible service options, and expanded access to key destinations. pg. 93
Appendix A. Existing Conditions
www.flexlynqs.com
Existing Conditions Report
City of Madera
Project: Microtransit Feasibility Study
April 29, 2026
Table of Contents
1 INTRODUCTION ..........................................................................................................................1 2 DATA SOURCES USED FOR THIS REVIEW......................................................................................2 3 DEMOGRAPHIC AND TRAVEL MARKET ANALYSIS ..........................................................................3

3.1 POPULATION ......................................................................................................................................3

3.2 AGE DISTRIBUTION ..............................................................................................................................5

3.3 RACE AND ETHNICITY...........................................................................................................................5

3.4 INCOME ............................................................................................................................................7

3.5 VEHICLE OWNERSHIP ..........................................................................................................................9

3.6 TRAVEL PATTERNS .............................................................................................................................11

3.6.1 Employment-Generated Trips........................................................................................11

3.6.2 Non-Employment Generated Trips .................................................................................13 4 TRANSIT OPERATIONS...............................................................................................................15

4.1 MADERA METRO FIXED ROUTE.............................................................................................................16

4.1.1 Madera Metro Key Performance Indicators (KPIs).............................................................19

4.1.2 Peer Agency Review .....................................................................................................26

4.2 DIAL-A-RIDE &ADA PARATRANSIT .......................................................................................................26

4.2.1 2024/2025 DAR & Paratransit Ridership.................................................................................28

4.3 TECHNOLOGY...................................................................................................................................30

4.4 MADERA METRO AND DIAL-A-RIDE VEHICLE FLEET..................................................................................31

4.5 REGIONAL TRANSIT SERVICES ..............................................................................................................31 5 NEXT STEPS ..............................................................................................................................33 Table Of Figures
Figure 3-1. Madera Population Density.......................................................................................... 4 Figure 3-2. Household Income Distribution – Regional Comparison ............................................ 7 Figure 3-3. Household Income Distribution (The City of Madera) ................................................. 8 Figure 3-4. Poverty Rate by Year (The City of Madera)................................................................. 9 Figure 3-5. Vehicle Ownership by Household (The City of Madera) ........................................... 10 Figure 3-6. Jobs Per Square Mile (The City of Madera) .............................................................. 12 Figure 4-1. Madera Metro Route Network.................................................................................... 16 Figure 4-2. Metro Fixed Route Performance Summary, 2020 - 2024.......................................... 19 Figure 4-3. Total Operating Cost, 2020 - 2024............................................................................. 20 Figure 4-4. Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, 2020 - 2024................................... 20 Figure 4-5. Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, 2020 – 2024 ................................................ 21 Figure 4-6. Boardings per Hour and per Capita, 2020 - 2024 ..................................................... 21 Figure 4-7. 2024/2025 System Ridership..................................................................................... 23 Figure 4-8. 2024/2025 System Ridership - Graph ...................................................................... 23 Figure 4-9. Distribution of Annual Ridership by Route (FY 2024-2025) ...................................... 24 Figure 4-10. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025)...................................................... 24 Figure 4-11. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025)...................................................... 25 Figure 4-12. Trips per Revenue Hour by Route (2025)................................................................ 25 Figure 4-13. Peer Agency Review (2023) .................................................................................... 26 Figure 4-14. DAR and ADA Paratransit Service Area .................................................................. 27 Figure 4-15. Annual Operating Statistics and KPIs – DAR & Paratransit (Calendar Year 2020- 2024) ............................................................................................................................................. 28 Figure 4-16. DAR and Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025)...................................... 29 Figure 4-17. DAR and Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025) - Graph ........................ 29 Figure 4-18. Fleet Inventory.......................................................................................................... 31 Table of Tables
Table 3-1. Population Trends by Age Group: Absolute and Percentage Change (The City of Madera)........................................................................................................................................... 5 Table 3-2. Race & Ethnicity Breakdown Non-Hispanic or Latino (The City of Madera) ................ 6 Table 3-3. Race & Ethnicity Breakdown Hispanic or Latino (The City of Madera) ........................ 6 Table 3-4. Major Employers in the City of Madera ........................................................................11 Table 4-1. Prominent Features by Route...................................................................................... 17 Introduction
April 29, 2026 1
1 Introduction
The City of Madera has embarked on a Microtransit Feasibility Study to evaluate how its transit system can evolve to better serve the community’s mobility needs. While Madera Metro provides a combination of fixed route, Dial-a-Ride, and ADA paratransit services, the city recognizes that many residents still face barriers in accessing reliable, convenient, and equitable transportation.

As the population grows and travel patterns shift, the need to evaluate more modern, flexible, technology-enabled options such as microtransit has become paramount.

This effort builds on the findings of the City’s previous Madera Transit Plan, which identified persistent challenges in network connectivity and service gaps for seniors, students, and lowincome households. That earlier process ultimately led to a system redesign of fixed-route service, strengthening the core network. However, it did not evaluate Dial-a-Ride operations or consider flexible, on-demand services as part of the solution. As a result, opportunities remain to evaluate different service types and create conceptual alternatives that address both coverage and equity concerns. The current study aims to address those gaps by examining fixed-route and on-demand services in tandem. By explicitly connecting these service types, the city can better understand how they complement one another, where they overlap, and if (and where) new models may be most effective.

This Existing Conditions Analysis is the critical first step in this process. Before new options can be considered, it is essential to develop a clear picture of how the system functions today:
where it performs well, where it struggles, and how different people experience it. This task combines a review of policies and operations, a detailed assessment of fixed-route, demandresponse, and ADA paratransit service data, a thorough demographic analysis, and initial feedback from the community and key stakeholders.

Together, these components establish the baseline conditions against which future alternatives will be informed and evaluated against. The takeaways from this memo should help frame the opportunities and challenges facing Madera Metro today, highlight areas where unmet needs are most pressing, and set the stage for developing targeted, data-driven scenarios in subsequent phases of the study.

Data Sources Used for this Review
April 29, 2026 2
2 Data Sources Used for this Review
To complete a comprehensive review and assessment of existing conditions in Madera, several sources of data were utilized. This included:
• Fixed-route ridership by route and year
• Fixed-route ridership by stop for select days in September • Dial-a-Ride and ADA paratransit ridership by hour
• Service policies, governance, and fare structures
• Fleet inventory and capital asset records
• 2010, 2020 and 5-year ACS Census data for population density, ethnicity, income, and vehicle ownership
• Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) employment origin-destination data
• Land-use data (schools, healthcare facilities, retail, employment hubs) • Previous Madera Transit Plan (MTP) and unmet needs analysis • National Transit Database reports (2020-2024)
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 3
3 Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
To make informed recommendations about service changes, it is critical to document and interpret key demographics in Madera’s service area. The majority of data presented in this section is drawn from the 2020 Census or the most recent American Community Survey (ACS) 2024 estimates, where available. For trendline analysis, 2019–2023 ACS 5-year aggregated estimates are used (2024 ACS is not incorporated into 5-year estimate tables at the time of this writing), and in some cases 2010 data is presented to illustrate longer-term shifts. Commuting and employment patterns are further informed by the Census OnTheMap tool, which utilizes 2022 LEHD data.

Together, these sources provide both a snapshot and a trajectory of how the city is changing.

Where possible, this data is corroborated and expanded upon through conversations with City staff and elected officials that took place in September 2025.

Population and density figures establish the baseline conditions that shape transit viability; Madera’s moderate density supports a possibility for fixed-route services but also highlights opportunities for more flexible coverage, particularly in lower-density neighborhoods and to schools. Income, poverty, and vehicle ownership data reveal the extent of transit dependency and affordability considerations that will impact service decisions such as fares, as well as highlight the presence of a captive market (riders who do not have alternatives to transit). At the same time, age distribution analysis underscores the need for a dual-access approach that serves both digitally connected youth and seniors who rely on more traditional booking mechanisms.

Race and ethnicity data underscore the need for bilingual access, materials, and communityembedded outreach. Meanwhile, travel patterns reveal the limitations of local transit for accessing regional or agricultural jobs and underscore the need to evaluate service in the context of major trip generators. Collectively, these demographic insights not only describe who lives and works in Madera but also frame the strategic implications for how fixed-route, paratransit, and potential microtransit services can best be integrated to meet community needs.

3.1 Population
Madera is one of only two incorporated cities in Madera County, positioned in the county’s southwestern area and bordered primarily by unincorporated land. According to the 2024 ACS, the city’s population is estimated at 69,097.
1 Between 2010 and 2024, Madera County overall grew by 9.7% percent, while the City of Madera grew at a notably faster pace of 17.1% percent, adding roughly 10,000 residents. This growth rate is nearly double that of the county as a whole.2 1 2024 ACS
2 2010 Decennial Census and 2024 ACS
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 4
Figure 3-1. Madera Population Density
As Figure 1 shows, the population of Madera is densest in the north and northeast parts of the city. In particular, many residences are located in neighborhoods near E. Yosemite Ave. and E.

Cleveland Ave. This trend is not uniform, however. Several dense blocks exist in the south end of the City in Parkwood, as well as neighborhoods in the west, such as those along Driftwood Dr.

Why it Matters
Population size and density have direct implications for transit viability. Research consistently shows that higher-density environments support stronger fixed-route performance, as routes are more likely to capture walk-up riders and serve multiple trip purposes along a corridor. In Madera, density levels are moderate: the city is compact enough that fixed routes can provide reasonable coverage if routes are designed efficiently, but not so dense that traditional fixedroute services will naturally attract large ridership volumes. Fixed routes may continue to have a role along the densest corridors where multiple trip generators (such as retail or employment centers) align, while on-demand services may be better suited to extend coverage into lowerdensity neighborhoods where fixed routes are less efficient, or during certain hours to help serve additional populations like high school and community college students. Population growth also matters: with steady increases in residents, demand for mobility options is likely to continue rising, and services designed today should anticipate additional capacity needs over the next decade.

Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 5

3.2 Age Distribution
Madera’s population skews younger, with just over 1/3 of the population below the age of 19.

However, the 20-44, 45-64 and 65+ age groups are growing at a much faster rate. Between 2010 and 2024, these groups grew 22%, 24.5%, and 21.5% respectively. Meanwhile, the population of residents under 19 rose by just 1,656 persons, or 7.2%. This suggests that while the youth population is high in Madera, there is a more rapidly growing middle age and older adult population, mirroring trends that are common across much of the United States.

Table 3-1. Population Trends by Age Group: Absolute and Percentage Change (The City of Madera) Age Group 2010 2024
Absolute
Change % Change
Under 19 22,926 24,582 1,656 7.2%
20 – 44 21,018 25,648 4,630 22%
45 – 64 13,453 17,805 4,352 24.5%
65+ 5,118 6,220 1,102 21.5%
Why it Matters
A youthful population increases demand for school and education-related trips, while also indicating a customer base that is relatively comfortable with app-based booking for ondemand trips. At the same time, the growing senior population conveys the importance of robust ADA paratransit services and non-app based offerings for transit as well. Senior riders often require accessible vehicles, phone-based booking, and greater assistance from drivers.

Together, this suggests the need for a dual-access system: smartphone booking and technology-driven improvements for younger riders, and accessible and supportive services for seniors and those less comfortable with technology.

3.3 Race and Ethnicity
The City of Madera is characterized by a predominantly Hispanic or Latino population, with more than 53,000 residents identifying in this group. This represents over 80% of the City’s population.

While other groups are much smaller in size, Madera does contain a diverse population inclusive of many different races and ethnicities, including American Indian and Alaska Native residents, Asian residents, Black or African American residents, and Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander residents.

Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 6
Table 3-2. Race & Ethnicity Breakdown Non-Hispanic or Latino (The City of Madera) Category Total Percent
White alone 8,523 12.7%
Black or African American alone 2,000 3%
American Indian & Alaska Native alone 107 0.2%
Asian alone 1,285 1.9%
Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander alone 98 0.1%
Some other race alone 39 0.1%
Two or more races 1,235 1.8%
Subtotal (Not Hispanic or Latino) 13,287 19.8%
Table 3-3. Race & Ethnicity Breakdown Hispanic or Latino (The City of Madera) Category Total Percent
White alone 12,420 18.5%
Black or African American alone 86 0.1%
American Indian & Alaska Native alone 1,212 1.8%
Asian alone 42 0.1%
Native Hawaiian & Pacific Islander alone 40 0.1%
Some other race alone 28,210 42%
Two or more races 11,836 17.6%
Subtotal (Hispanic or Latino) 53,846 80.2%
Why it Matters
Language accessibility is fundamental to service design in Madera. Bilingual apps, printed schedules, and call center support are not optional features but essential for ensuring equitable access. Marketing and outreach must also take place through trusted community channels such as churches, schools, and Spanish-language media. Without these measures, the uptake of any new transit service offerings or service designs—especially technologydriven ones—would risk being limited to a narrow segment of the population.

Operations also need to be cognizant of cultural diversity. Services should accommodate special events, employment centers, schools, and other destinations frequented by such a diverse community.

Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 7

3.4 Income
With a median household income of $63,6193, household incomes in Madera are relatively lower compared to regional, statewide, and national averages. Incomes skew slightly towards lower brackets but are overall distributed relatively evenly (see Figure 3-3).

Figure 3-2. Household Income Distribution – Regional Comparison 3 2023 ACS
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 8
Figure 3-3. Household Income Distribution (The City of Madera) Poverty rates are also reported via the ACS. The definition of poverty rate is the percentage of people whose income in the past 12 months is below the federal poverty threshold, which is set each year by the Census Bureau using official poverty thresholds based on family size and composition. For example, in 2023 the poverty threshold for a family of four was $29,960.

Over the last five years, between one-fifth and one-quarter of households in Madera have been considered below the poverty line. These estimates are relatively stable but have declined slightly over the last five years.

Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 9
Figure 3-4. Poverty Rate by Year (The City of Madera)
Why it Matters
Lower household incomes and higher poverty rates are closely associated with higher transit dependency, as fewer households can afford multiple vehicles or the costs of fuel, insurance, and maintenance.4 For Madera, this means a significant share of riders are likely “captive riders”—residents who depend on transit because they lack other options. This increases the importance of keeping fares affordable (or free) and predictable. For microtransit, in particular, it raises a caution: if pricing drifts toward ride hailing models (i.e., Uber/Lyft), it risks excluding the very populations most likely to rely on the service.

3.5 Vehicle Ownership
Vehicle ownership and travel patterns help inform areas of critical service for transit agencies and help identify target areas or populations. The latest available mode splits detailing travel patterns in Madera County indicate that the vast majority of travel is conducted via private automobile. An estimated 91% of county residents have at least one vehicle.5 Still, for the remaining population and in many cases for vehicle owners, transit still plays a crucial role in the mobility ecosystem. 4 Taylor, B.D. & Morris, E.A. (2015). “Public transportation objectives and rider demographics.” Transportation Research.
5 ACS 2023
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 10
Figure 3-5. Vehicle Ownership by Household (The City of Madera) While commutes in the United States do not account for all travel, they do represent one of the largest trip generators. Commute times in Madera average 26 minutes, with many residents working in Fresno or other surrounding areas. Jobs in Madera are most concentrated in the City core and near Golden State Highway, specifically around Howard and Pine6.

Why it Matters
Beyond zero-car households, high shares of one-vehicle households mean that many families may have a vehicle but that it’s not available to some people within the house during some hours. This is particularly common for students, seniors, and part-time workers who may be left without access when the household’s single vehicle is being used for commuting. Transit thus becomes essential not just for those without any car, but also for those with limited access to one. For Madera, this implies steady demand for local mobility options during school, mid-day, and evening periods—times when fixed routes are operating with reduced service. Microtransit could play a strong role in filling these gaps. 6 US Census On The Map Tool
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 11

3.6 Travel Patterns

3.6.1 Employment-Generated Trips
In 2022, the Madera County Transportation Commission (Madera CTC) released a Short-Range Transition Plan covering FY 2022/23 to 2026/27. This plan highlighted major employers within Madera County. Table 4 summarizes the information shared in the plan by focusing on the major employers located in the City of Madera specifically.

Table 3-4. Major Employers in the City of Madera7
Employer Number of Employees
Madera Unified School District 3,500
Madera Community Hospital 936
City of Madera 400
Ardagh Group 350
Constellation Brands 350
Walmart 350
U.S. Government 300
Cherokee Freight Lines 250-499
Baltimore Aircoil Co. 242
Community Action Partnership of Madera County 235
JBT Food Tech 165
EVAPCO, Inc. 140
Georgia-Pacific Corp-Madera 125
Home Depot 100-249
Lowe’s Home Improvement 100-249
Span Construction, Inc. 100-249
Madera Rehab Center 100-249
Azteca Milling 100
Oldcastle Enclosure Solutions 100
Figure 3-6 offers a visual representation of the density of employment within the City of Madera, measured as the number of jobs per square mile. The graphic shows that east and west of Highway 99 in Central Madera serve as major employment centers, with several areas reaching a maximum density of about 10,500 jobs per square mile. It’s critical to note however, that nearly 24% of jobs for Madera residents are agricultural and most of those jobs are outside of the City.8 7 Madera County Transportation Commission. (2022). Short Range Transition Plan FY 2022/23 to 2026/27. Madera County Transportation Commission.
8 2023 ACS
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 12
In addition, more people are leaving the City of Madera to go to work than are living and working in Madera or living outside of Madera and coming there to work.

Figure 3-6. Jobs Per Square Mile (The City of Madera)
Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 13

3.6.1.1 Emerging Major Employers
The North Fork Mono Casino
The North Fork Mono Casino is expected to open in Summer 2026, located near Highway 99 between Avenue 17 and Avenue 18 ½ exits. It will create over 1,000 jobs and include two fullservice restaurants. The casino plans to be open 24/7. Although a few job listings are currently available, most positions are expected to be posted in early 2026.

Why it Matters
Employment-generated trips are critical to evaluate for any transit service planning exercise, and there certainly are areas within Madera where many jobs are relatively dense. For employees working in Madera, it will be important to design transit services that accommodate all kinds of work schedules, including shift rotations with off-peak hours. This can be accomplished either by adjusting route schedules or by integrating more flexible services to support employees with flexible transit solutions such as microtransit that can be utilized during off-peak times.

Still, many jobs Madera residents have are outside of the City. Microtransit or any modification to fixed-route service within the city limits is unlikely to substitute for long regional commutes.

Instead, its greatest value may be in supporting first/last-mile connections to other regional services. In other words, modifications to service should be seen as a tool to improve local circulation and system connectivity while complementing regional services, not as a replacement for all commuter traffic.

Lastly, it is imperative to consider and strategically plan for significant emerging employmentdriven trip generators, such as the North Fork Mono Casino. Given that the casino is projected to employ more than 1,000 individuals, this presents a substantial opportunity for Madera to support its community by providing dependable and efficient transportation to this new workforce. Appropriately addressing the needs of this community could benefit transitdependent residents and potentially encourage privately-vehicle owners to utilize public transit, thereby alleviating congestion during peak periods and reducing overall emissions.

3.6.2 Non-Employment Generated Trips
Non-employment trip generators include travel to schools, retail, commercial, health and entertainment destinations. Many of the major trip generators in this category include trips to and from Madera Community College, Walmart/Walgreens, grocery stores such as San Miguel market, the intermodal station, shops along Sherwood Way and Country Club Drive, and Madera Department of Corrections. There are also trips generated between Madera and Fresno for shopping, medical appointments, and other trip purposes that are not currently accommodated by transit.

Demographic and Travel Market Analysis
April 29, 2026 14
While fixed-route services support many of these major non-employment trip generators within Madera, travel times to these destinations can be significant. Additionally, the demand for travel to specific non-employment destinations can vary significantly. For example, school trips will be higher in demand during weekdays than weekends and will not have the same demand in the summers. It’s also important to examine the needs of the passenger for these trip types. For instance, travelers going to grocery stores often leave with multiple bags, and the walk either to the fixed-route stop, or in some cases all the way home which can be burdensome. Lastly, since these non-employment trip generators are not centralized, it can be quite difficult for a fixed-route system to serve every destination efficiently.

Why it Matters
Focusing solely on commuter trips risks overlooking the majority of travel demand in Madera.

Given the city’s demographics and household patterns, non-work trips are central to mobility needs. Microtransit services can be particularly effective in these areas because they can be flexible, can serve off-peak demand, and can extend coverage to areas where fixed-route service is not viable or timely.

At the same time, regional coordination to facilitate better travel to and from the Fresno area on transit is important. Residents of Madera are not living their whole lives within the boundaries of the city, and travel to regional locations without an automobile proves particularly inconvenient and time consuming.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 15
4 Transit Operations
Public transit plays a critical role in ensuring mobility, accessibility, and equity within urban and rural communities. In Madera, the local transit system serves as a vital link connecting residents to employment, education, healthcare, and regional destinations. Understanding how the transit system performs is essential for guiding improvements, allocating resources effectively, and meeting the community’s evolving mobility needs.

The city contracts with MV Public Transportation, Inc. for the provision of key personnel and management of transit services. The term of the current contract is from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2027, with an option to extend for one additional year, through to June 30, 2028. The city completed the construction of the Madera Transit Center located at 1951 Independence Drive.

The facility opened in the fall of 2020 and provides facilities for fueling, washing, maintenance, parking, and administrative functions. The City’s Fleet Services / Fleet Maintenance Department handles maintenance of transit vehicles.

This analysis provides a review of Madera’s transit operations, focusing on service efficiency, ridership trends, and overall system effectiveness. By examining key performance metrics such as on-time performance, passenger trips per revenue hour, cost per passenger, and service coverage, this study aims to identify strengths, challenges, and opportunities for optimization.

Additionally, the analysis contextualizes Madera’s performance relative to peer systems and national benchmarks, providing decision-makers with actionable insights for strategic planning and future investment.

Ultimately, the goal of this performance analysis is to support data-driven decisions that enhance transit service quality, improve rider experience, and promote sustainable and equitable transportation solutions throughout the Madera community.

Analytical Approach: The performance analysis applies a combination of descriptive statistics, benchmarking, and ratio-based performance indicators, including:
• Productivity Metrics: Passengers per revenue hour, passengers per trip. • Cost Efficiency Metrics: Operating cost per passenger, cost per revenue mile. • Trend Analysis: Year-over-year changes in ridership, service hours, and operational costs.

Where applicable, the analysis benchmarks Madera’s performance against peer transit systems of similar size and demographics, as reported to the National Transit Database (NTD). This approach identifies both relative strengths and areas requiring improvement.

Madera Metro operates a fixed-route bus system designed to provide local public transportation within the City of Madera. The route structure is built around four main bus routes, each serving distinct corridors while connecting key destinations across the city.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 16

4.1 Madera Metro Fixed Route
Figure 4-1 presents a map of the current Madera Metro route network. Salient aspects of the route network include:
• Madera Metro currently operates four fixed routes (Purple / Route 1, Orange / Route 2, Green / Route 3, Blue / Route 4).
• Fixed-route service runs weekdays 7:00 a.m. – 6:30 p.m., and Saturdays 9:00 a.m. – 4:00 p.m.
• Fares for fixed routes have been waived (fare-free) until further notice. • Notably: Green (Route 3) and Blue (Route 4) do not run on Saturdays • The Blue Line’s scheduled stop at the Amtrak Station is paused as of the latest updates; currently its terminal is Matilda Torres High School.
• Some routes have major transfer points, at the Intermodal Center (downtown Madera), and Walgreens.

Figure 4-1. Madera Metro Route Network
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 17
The following provides salient aspects for each of the four routes:

Table 4-1. Prominent Features by Route
Route Key Streets / Corridors
Served
Major Stops / Landmarks Frequency &
Operation
Route 1
Purple
Primarily
serves Cleveland, Yosemite,
Olive, Tozer, Almond
Walgreens at Cleveland,
Intermodal Center, P & Yosemite,
Madera South High School,
Madera Community Hospital
~30 min headways
typical. https://ww
w.transit.land/rout
es/r-9qddkroute1?utm_sourc
e=chatgpt.com
Route 2
Orange
Covers Granada, Stadium,
Pecan, Tozer, Olive corridors
Intermodal Center, P & Yosemite,
Madera South High, various west /
southwest neighborhoods
Less frequent than
Route 1 — typical
round-trip time ~60
minutes.

Route 3
Green
Through Schnoor, Howard,
Stadium, Pecan corridors
toward Madera Community
College
P & Yosemite, Madera South High
School, Madera College, various
neighborhoods along Howard /
Schnoor
Runs Monday–
Friday only (no
Saturday service).

Route 4
Blue
East-west / northern
corridors, parts of
northeastern Madera
Matilda Torres High School
(current terminus), Intermodal
transfers, other shared stops
Weekdays only (no
Saturday service)
Route Design Characteristics:

2. Fixed Routes with Loops
o Each route generally operates as a one-way or bi-directional loop, covering residential areas, commercial zones, schools, and public services. o This loop structure allows for broad coverage while minimizing the need for multiple transfers.

3. Geographic Coverage
o The routes are designed to cover all major quadrants of the city, ensuring that most residents are within walking distance of a stop.
o Routes are structured to provide access to:
▪ Downtown Madera
▪ Government buildings and the civic center
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 18
▪ Shopping centers
▪ Medical facilities
▪ Schools and colleges
▪ Residential neighborhoods

Transfers & Interconnectivity:
• Routes 1, 2, and 3 are designed to allow transfers at a central location, the Intermodal Center Bus Station, in downtown Madera.
• This setup enables citywide mobility even though each individual route operates as a loop or radial.

Strengths of the Route Structure:
• Simple and easy to understand: Fewer routes with consistent paths. • Broad coverage of city areas despite a small fleet.
• Centralized transfer point helps riders access most destinations with one transfer.

Challenges:
• Loop routes may increase travel time for some trips.
• Limited frequency can make transfers inconvenient.
• Weekend or evening service gaps may reduce accessibility for certain populations.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 19

4.1.1 Madera Metro Key Performance Indicators (KPIs)
The analysis of Madera Metro transit system reveals insights into operational efficiency, service effectiveness, and rider experience. Key performance indicators (KPIs) identify opportunities for improvement.

Summary operating statistics and key performance indicators for the five-year period – 2020 through 20249is presented in Figure 4-2.

For this same five-year period, Total Operating Cost, Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, and Boardings per Hour and per Capita, are presented in Figure 4-3 through Figure 4-6, respectively Figure 4-2. Metro Fixed Route Performance Summary, 2020 - 2024 9 Of note: the Covid pandemic: 2020/21
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 20
Figure 4-3. Total Operating Cost, 2020 - 2024
Figure 4-4. Annual Boardings and Revenue Vehicle Hours, 2020 - 2024 Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 21
Figure 4-5. Cost per Boarding and Revenue Hour, 2020 – 2024 Figure 4-6. Boardings per Hour and per Capita, 2020 - 2024 Key Takeaways (2020-2024 KPIs):
• Increased Costs: Net operating costs increased by 56.6% o Net cost per boarding increased by 67.7%
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 22
o Net cost per revenue hour increased by 65.4% while the number of revenue hours saw a slight decline of 5.4%
• Declining Ridership: Annual boardings decreased by 6.6% o Boardings per revenue hour declined only 2.1%
o Annual boardings per capita declined 10.4%
2024/2025 Metro Ridership
Figures 4-7 and 4-8 present fixed route ridership by month for each of the four routes, for the 2024-2025 fiscal period.

Figure 4-9 illustrates the distribution of annual ridership by route (2024/2025) Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 23
Figure 4-7. 2024/2025 System Ridership
Figure 4-7. 2024/2025 System Ridership
Figure 4-8. 2024/2025 System Ridership - Graph
MONTH ROUTE 1 ROUTE 2 ROUTE 3 ROUTE 4
FR

MONTHLY
TOTAL
July 3,341 2,146 430 253 6,170
August 3,025 2,540 781 179 6,525
September 2,495 2,068 1,269 198 6,030
October 2,686 1,803 1,653 228 6,370
November 2,504 1,597 1,125 235 5,461
December 2,465 1,627 804 185 5,081
January 2,898 2,260 1,252 369 6,779
February 2,863 1,926 1,238 339 6,366
March 2,942 2,151 1,325 334 6,752
April 3,261 2,376 1,152 345 7,134
May 3,156 2,234 1,118 346 6,854
June 2,848 2,306 594 276 6,024
SUBTOTALS 34,484 25,034 12,741 3,287 75,546
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 24
Figure 4-9. Distribution of Annual Ridership by Route (FY 2024-2025) The current distribution of revenue hours by route is presented in Figures 4-10 and 4-11. Figure 4-12 presents the number of trips per revenue hour by route.

Figure 4-10. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025) Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 25
Figure 4-11. Distribution of Revenue Hours by Route (2025) Figure 4-12. Trips per Revenue Hour by Route (2025)
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 26

4.1.2 Peer Agency Review
The purpose of this Peer Agency Review is to evaluate Madera Metro's transit services by comparing them to those of similar-sized and similarly structured transit agencies. This process allows Madera Metro to benchmark its performance and will inform on the development of service improvement strategies including the feasibility of microtransit to improve local transit service delivery, efficiency, and rider satisfaction.

The Peer Agency Review is presented in Figure 4-13.

4.2 Dial-A-Ride & ADA Paratransit
Madera Metro Dial-A-Ride (DAR) is a curb-to-curb, demand-responsive transit service available to the general public within the City of Madera. It is designed to serve residents who may not have easy access to the fixed-route bus system, including seniors, people with disabilities, and those traveling outside of fixed-route coverage or service hours.

DAR’s service hours are:
• Monday—Friday: 7:00am—6:30pm
• Saturday: 9:00am—4:00pm
• Sunday: 8:30am—2:30pm
Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 27
DAR is free for people under 17 years of age, seniors (60+), disabled, veterans, and college students with ID. Others pay a $3.00 fare.

City of Madera Transit Services provide ADA/Paratransit (ADAP) Service for Seniors (60+), Veterans, and ADA eligible passengers. This service provides complementary curb-to-curb transportation for individuals who are unable to use the fixed-route bus system due to a disability.

Riders must be certified as ADA-eligible through an application and approval process. Trips must be scheduled at least one day in advance, though same-day service may be offered if space is available.

Figure 4-14 illustrates the and ADA paratransit service area.

Figure 4-14. DAR and ADA Paratransit Service Area
Figure 4-2 presents annual (2020 – 2024) operating statistics and KPIs for the DAR and Paratransit services.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 28
Figure 4-15. Annual Operating Statistics and KPIs – DAR & Paratransit (Calendar Year 2020-2024) Key Takeaways (2020-2024 KPIs):
• Increased Costs: Net operating costs increased by 26.4% o Net cost per boarding declined by 8.8%
o Net cost per revenue hour increased by 27.6% while the number of revenue hours saw a slight decline of 1%
• Increased Ridership: Annual boardings increased by 38.6% o Boardings per revenue hour increased 37.5% (indicator of increased productivity) o Annual boardings per capita increased 36.8%

4.2.1 2024/2025 DAR & Paratransit Ridership
Figures and 4-17 present DAR and Paratransit ridership by month for the 2024-2025 fiscal period.

Of note, there is a marginal seasonal fluctuation in demand with slight peaking in demand in the Fall and Spring months.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 29
Figure 4-16. DAR and Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025) Figure 4-17. DAR and Paratransit Ridership by Month (FY2024-2025) - Graph Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 30

4.3 Technology
To enhance the efficiency, accessibility, and user experience of its transit services, Madera Metro has recently deployed (September 2025) two key technology platforms: TripShot and Spare Labs.

TripShot: Fixed-Route Operations Management: TripShot is used to manage Madera Metro’s fixed-route bus system, offering real-time vehicle tracking, schedule adherence monitoring, and improved coordination for operations staff. It also enhances the rider experience by providing up-todate bus arrival information and alerts through mobile and web applications.

Spare Labs: Demand-Responsive Transit Platform: Spare Labs powers Madera Metro’s ADA Paratransit and Dial-A-Ride services. This platform allows eligible riders to book, modify, and track their trips through a userfriendly mobile app or call-in interface.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 31

4.4 Madera Metro and Dial-A-Ride Vehicle Fleet
The city currently has a fleet of 21 vehicles (including spares), as shown in Figure 4-18. Thirteen vehicles designated for use to operate Madera Metro, and 8 vehicles are used to operate DialA-Ride and Paratransit. Vehicles are maintained by the City’s Public Works Department.

Bus # Service Year Make Model Fuel Type #SEATS LENGTH DELIVERY

FLEET INVENTORY
Figure 4-18. Fleet Inventory

4.5 Regional Transit Services
The following profiles the range of regional transit services designed to connect urban centers, rural communities, medical facilities, and key destinations both inside and outside city limits. The goal is to ensure mobility for those without private transportation, link communities, and support economic, healthcare, educational, and recreational access across the county and beyond.

Key Providers & Service Types
• Madera County Connection (MCC): A primary intercity fixed-route bus network connecting cities like Madera and Chowchilla, as well as smaller unincorporated areas.

Includes fixed routes, dial-a-ride services, senior and medical escort services.

Transit Operations
April 29, 2026 32
• Chowchilla Area Transit Express (CATX): A demand-response (dial-a-ride style) service within Chowchilla and contiguous unincorporated areas. CATX helps serve local mobility, especially for those underserved by fixed routes.
• Other supporting services:
o Senior Bus / Medical Escort programs in rural and eastern sections of the county.
o Yosemite Area Regional Transportation System (YARTS): While not exclusively Madera County, YARTS provides seasonal and year-round service along highways that include segments in Madera County, to link communities to Yosemite National Park.
o Private intercity services (like Greyhound) and passenger rail (Amtrak) augment local/regional services. Madera has a train station served by Amtrak’s San Joaquins line.

Next Steps
April 29, 2026 33
5 Next Steps
The Existing Conditions analysis provides a foundational understanding of the demographic, socio-economic, and mobility landscape within Madera. These insights will guide the development of data-driven strategies to enhance Madera Metro’s service effectiveness, equity, and sustainability. Building on this baseline assessment, the Flexlynqs team will be advancing the following next steps:

1. Building on the Identification of Key Markets, Service Needs and Transit Performance Develop demand models that combine historical ridership, census demographics, and travel behavior data. Demand is segmented by service type to capture both existing and latent demand. The modeling will test rider response to new service designs and technology upgrades, while identifying overlaps and gaps across populations and trip purposes.

2. Engage the Community and Stakeholders Conduct targeted outreach—through surveys (general community, high school students and college students), and pop-up events - to validate findings, identify unmet mobility needs, and understand community priorities for transit service improvements.

3. Assess Service Gaps and Opportunities Overlay existing service performance with demand indicators to identify areas where transit coverage, frequency, or connectivity can be improved. This may include potential new service corridors and first/last-mile opportunities.

4. Develop Service Improvement Scenarios Based on performance data and community input, the team will draft potential service strategies and network concepts. These may include route restructuring, increased service frequency, expanded span of service, or new service models such as microtransit.

5. Evaluate Equity and Accessibility Impacts Ensure proposed service changes align with Title VI

6. Coordinate with Regional Planning Efforts Align Madera Metro’s service planning with broader city, county, and regional transportation and land use initiatives to maximize efficiency and support future growth.

7. Prepare for Alternatives Analysis and Plan Development The findings from this report will directly inform the next phase of the study—developing and evaluating service alternatives and implementation strategies. This will include ridership forecasting, cost estimation, and phasing considerations.
pg. 94
Appendix B. Industry Scan
Industry Scan
City of Madera
Project: Microtransit Feasibility Study
March 26, 2026
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................... 4 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................. 5

1.1 PURPOSE AND OBJECTIVES................................................................................................ 5

1.2 SCOPE OF ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................ 5

1.3 CONTEXT ...................................................................................................................... 5 2 METHODOLOGY............................................................................................................. 7

2.1 APPROACH.................................................................................................................... 7

2.2 DATA SOURCES .............................................................................................................. 7

2.3 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK ................................................................................................. 8 3 IDENTIFIED TRENDS....................................................................................................... 9

3.1 SERVICE MODELS ........................................................................................................... 9

3.2 TECHNOLOGY AND OPERATIONS ........................................................................................12

3.3 FUNDING AND GOVERNANCE ............................................................................................12

3.4 EQUITY AND ACCESSIBILITY ..............................................................................................12

3.5 PERFORMANCE METRICS AND OUTCOMES ...........................................................................12

3.6 COMPARATIVE ASSESSMENT .............................................................................................13 4 EMERGING TRENDS ......................................................................................................16

4.1 MOBILITY-AS-A-SERVICE (MAAS) INTEGRATION.....................................................................16

4.2 REGIONAL COORDINATION AND INTERAGENCY PARTNERSHIPS..................................................16

4.3 AUTONOMOUS AND CONNECTED VEHICLE PILOTS..................................................................16

4.4 EQUITY AND INCLUSION INNOVATIONS ................................................................................17 5 TARGETED APPLICATIONS AND REGIONAL PROFILES .....................................................18

5.1 FIXED-ROUTE REPLACEMENT MODELS ................................................................................18

5.2 MICROTRANSIT FOR STUDENTS..........................................................................................20 pg. 3
HIGH SCHOOL AND DISTRICT APPLICATIONS...................................................................................... 20 HIGHER-EDUCATION APPLICATIONS................................................................................................. 21

5.3 MIGRANT AND AGRICULTURAL WORKER MOBILITY .................................................................22

5.4 MICROTRANSIT IN CALIFORNIA’S CENTRAL VALLEY ................................................................24 6 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ....................................................................26

6.1 KEY FINDINGS...............................................................................................................26 POLICY AND IMPLEMENTATION RECOMMENDATIONS .......................................................................27

6.2 RELEVANCE TO MADERA ..................................................................................................28 7 BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................................................29 Table of Figures
Figure 3-1. Using PSTA's Direct Connect in the Transit App [1] ................................................. 9 Figure 4-1. PRESTO Bishop Ranch Shuttle Loop [26] ............................................................... 17 Figure 5-1. Wilson, NC – RIDE by Via - Popular Destinations [27]............................................. 18 Figure 5-2. HopSkipDrive's Website – RideIQ [34]..................................................................... 21 Figure 5-3. San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) – Van Go! [39] ................................... 24 Table of Tables
Table 3-1. Illustrative U.S. Microtransit Service Models and Case Examples ............................ 10 Table 3-2. Summary of Microtransit Program Performance Metrics, Key Results and Lessons Learned....................................................................................................................................... 14 Table 5-1. Summary of Fixed-Route Replacement Microtransit Programs and Key Performance Outcomes.................................................................................................................................... 19 Table 5-2. Summary of Migrant and Agricultural Worker Mobility Programs and Key Lessons Learned....................................................................................................................................... 23 Table 5-3 Summary of Microtransit Programs and Regional Coordination Efforts in California’s Central Valley.............................................................................................................................. 25 pg. 4
Executive Summary
Across the United States, small-urban transit systems are increasingly adopting on-demand and microtransit models to expand coverage, improve cost efficiency, and meet diverse mobility needs. Drawing upon national research and agency case studies including AC Transit Flex (Alameda-Contra Costa Transit District, California), PSTA Direct Connect (Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, Florida, and GoMonrovia (City of Monrovia, California), this report synthesizes best practices and implementation lessons pertinent to areas with populations ranging from approximately 50,000 to 250,000 residents. Microtransit addresses service gaps where fixedroute services are insufficient. Effective programs typically incorporate well-defined service zones, contracts contingent on performance metrics, integrated booking technology, and collaboration with paratransit or fixed-route networks. The ensuing findings summarize the primary considerations related to service quality, technological integration, financial support, equity, and innovative approaches that contribute to successful microtransit operations within small-urban environments.

Key findings include:
• Service Design: Zone-based microtransit with dynamic routing yields optimal performance in low-density environments.
• Technology: Mobile booking, real-time routing, and integrated fare payment enhance reliability
• Funding & Governance: Performance-based contracts combined with modest subsidies help ensure sustainability.
• Equity: Call-in and cash options maintain compliance with ADA and Title VI. • Innovation: MaaS1, AI-enabled dispatch and electric vehicles are enhancing system capabilities.

These principles, along with insights from fixed-route replacements, student-focused initiatives, migrant-community programs, and regional deployments, showcase microtransit as a versatile, cost-effective, inclusive, and scalable transportation solution. 1 MaaS (Mobility as a Service) refers to a service model that integrates various forms of transport and transportrelated services into a single, comprehensive, and on-demand mobility service. It allows users to plan, book, and pay for multiple types of mobility services through an integrated platform, offering flexible mobility solutions based on individual travel needs.
pg. 5
1 Introduction

1.1 Purpose and Objectives
This report identifies practical strategies, innovations, and lessons learned in the planning and implementation of on-demand and microtransit services within small-urban settings. It provides comprehensive guidance for agencies and MPOs assessing flexible mobility solutions aimed at enhancing efficiency, equity, and customer satisfaction.

1.2 Scope of Analysis
This report consolidates insights from national studies, agency evaluations, and regional implementation research to highlight successful models for on-demand and microtransit services in small-urban areas. The focus is on practical lessons, performance results, and governance structures that local and regional transit agencies can replicate or modify.

The report includes a wide variety of case studies and implementation reviews from throughout the United States including but not limited to:
• Technology-driven programs such as AC Transit Flex (CA), PSTA Direct Connect (FL), S AM (Sioux Area Metro) On Demand (SD), and SacRT SmaRT Ride (CA) • Fixed-route replacement initiatives in Wilson (NC) and Arlington (TX). • Specialized mobility pilots serving students and others supporting migrants workers; and • Regional planning efforts in including but not limited to Fresno COG.

The scope is limited to U.S. programs and research that is relevant to small-urban and rural regions, typically featuring city populations between approximately 50,000 and 250,000. This focus is intended to align with domestic policy, funding considerations, and comparable demographic challenges and requirements. Additionally, the report examines emerging trends and approaches that might not be relevant to every small-urban or rural setting but offer valuable insights across the industry, supporting a thorough and well-rounded analysis. The report highlights lessons that can support implementation, performance measurement, technology procurement, and interagency coordination for transit providers aiming to modernize services in small-urban environments.

1.3 Context
Microtransit, technology-enabled demand-responsive service using small vehicles, has shifted from pilot programs to a standard practice. For small-urban agencies, it provides an effective balance between coverage and efficiency, helps address workforce shortages, and aligns with federal priorities around innovation and equitable access.The following sections present findings pg. 6
on service models, technological innovations, governance structures, equity issues, and implementation trends.
pg. 7
2 Methodology

2.1 Approach
A comparative analysis of multiple sources was undertaken, considering the following criteria as applicable:
• Service design (zone, corridor, or route deviation)
• Technology platform capabilities
• Performance metrics (productivity, cost per trip, wait times) • Governance and funding models
• Equity and accessibility criteria
Both qualitative and quantitative evidence informed cross-case comparison and pattern identification.

2.2 Data Sources
This report combines insights from national studies, agency evaluations, and regional research to showcase effective models for on-demand and microtransit services in small-urban areas.

Primary source materials consist of federal research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) and the Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP). These include reports produced by industry consultant groups (inclusive of work conducted by our team) and case studies from various agencies that offer practical insights into planning and operational practices. Additionally, primary research includes reviews of recent agency documentation, such as board meeting minutes, service change updates, published ridership reports, and relevant industry articles. This review aims to further investigate microtransit and mobility-on-demand pilots, technological integration, and policy issues relevant to small-urban and rural settings.

Case studies and implementation reviews were selected to highlight a variety of operating environments, governance structures, and technology providers. They include, but are not limited to, suburban and small-urban programs in California, Florida, and Texas, as well as regional efforts. Together, these sources provide insights into:
• Service design and performance metrics (ridership, cost per trip, productivity); • Contracting and governance structures;
• Technology platforms and data management practices; and • Equity and accessibility considerations.

Together, these materials offer both quantitative and qualitative insights, allowing for comparisons of microtransit results across different geographic, demographic, and other contextual factors.

The data are examined to find common success factors, lessons learned, main takeaways, and pg. 8
emerging practices that can help small-urban transit agencies develop, assess, and grow ondemand service models.

2.3 Analytical Framework
Key performance measures were benchmarked to assess overall service effectiveness, understand operational trends, and support comparisons across different service models. Results were arranged to highlight the most transferable best practices.
pg. 9
3 Identified Trends

3.1 Service Models
Across the United States, agencies are adopting microtransit and on-demand services through various structural models tailored to regional needs. The examples below show how agencies have implemented different service models including ADA paratransit and microtransit managed via a unified software platform, employer and destination shuttles, public–private partnerships, and flexible zone-based microtransit to support flexible, demand-responsive mobility goals. Table 3-1 outlines the range of deployments, including several initiatives that have since been discontinued. Including both active and discontinued services offers a more complete understanding of how changing rider expectations, evolving travel patterns, and operational challenges affect the sustainability of flexible service models. This highlights the ongoing difficulty agencies face in finding service designs that remain effective in dynamic and often unpredictable operational environments. Lessons learned from discontinued programs are further detailed in Table 3-2.

Figure 3-1. Using PSTA's Direct Connect in the Transit App [1] pg. 10
Table 3-1. Illustrative U.S. Microtransit Service Models and Case Examples Service Model Type Program / Agency (State) Description of Structure and Operations Status Source ADA Paratransit &
Microtransit
(operated via the
same software)
SAM On Demand
Sioux Area Metro
(SD)
SAM Transit provides accessible microtransit alongside
paratransit. Microtransit and paratransit operate on the same software (Via), with approximately 16% of trips by paratransit-eligible riders in 2024 served through
microtransit.

SAM (Sioux Area Metro) On Demand remains an active service at SAM Transit. Riders can pay via app or with cash vouchers on board. [2] [ [3] [4]
Employer /
Destination Shuttles
COTA GREAT Shuttle
Service
Central Ohio Transit
Authority
(OH)
The GREAT Shuttle functions as a fixed-stop, workforceoriented connector service that links COTA bus routes with nearby employers within the industrial zones of
Rickenbacker and Groveport–Obetz. It operates along
predetermined routes, making stops at all designated
shuttle stops. The schedule is aligned with major employee shift times to provide dependable access to employment
sites. This service is provided at no cost to passengers and is supported through collaborations with local
municipalities and regional organizations.

The GREAT Shuttle continues to operate as an active
workforce-mobility program supporting the region’s
expanding logistics and industrial corridor. Service
adjustments are ongoing to address changing employer
needs, ridership trends, and shift schedules. It is part of larger regional mobility planning efforts. For example, COTA is launching a new transit hub, the Rickenbacker Area Mobility Center (RAMC), which will enhance connections between
COTA’s fixed-route buses and various workforce shuttle
options, including the Groveport Rickenbacker Employee
Access Transit (GREAT).
[5] [6] [7]
Public–Private
Partnerships
PSTA Direct Connect
Pinellas Suncoast
Transit Authority
(FL)
PSTA Direct Connect partners with Uber, Lyft, United Taxi, and Wheelchair Transport to provide subsidized first- and last-mile transportation within Pinellas County. PSTA will cover up to $5 of your trip via Uber, Lyft, or United Taxi, and $25 off your trip via Wheelchair Transport.

Direct Connect currently operates in 26 locations across the county from 5:00 a.m. until 12:00 a.m., seven days a week, and can now be accessed via the Transit App. [1]
Public–Private
Partnerships
GoMonrovia Lyft Pass
GoMonrovia
(CA)
GoMonrovia Lyft Pass is a public-private transit program in partnership with Lyft. Passengers within the designated service area are eligible to utilize discounted Lyft rides, accommodating up to four passengers within the area.

After creating a Lyft account, riders may apply the code "GOMONROVIA" as a Lyft pass. The passenger is
responsible for paying the first $6.00, and GoMonrovia will cover up to $15.00 of the remaining fare.

The GoMonrovia Lyft Pass remains operational. During the fiscal year 2023-24, GoMonrovia completed a total of 162,310 trips, representing a 30 percent increase compared to 2022- 2023. [8] [9]
pg. 11
Service Model Type Program / Agency (State) Description of Structure and Operations Status Source Public–Private
Partnerships
Southwest Prime
Southwest Transit
(MN)
SW Prime is an on-demand, shared-ride microtransit
service serving the Southwest Twin Cities area, allowing riders to request trips through a mobile app or by phone.

The service is designed with a flexible implementation
approach that tailors service to different trip needs through targeted programs and designated pickup and drop-off
locations. This approach includes collaboration with major employment centers, commercial corridors, grocery
retailers, and medical institutions to improve access and, in some cases, offer discounted or subsidized fares. SW Prime also incorporates optional connections to third-party rideshare services to expand coverage and enhance firstand last-mile mobility.

Southwest Prime launched in July 2015 and continues to
operate today. Building on its partnership-based approach, the service introduced five autonomous vehicles to the SW Prime fleet in November 2024. These vehicles operate
exclusively within a designated zone in Eden Prairie. Target wait time for all SW Prime service is 20 – 25 minutes.
[10] [11]
Public–Private
Partnerships
Click-and-Ride
Plymouth Metrolink
(MN)
Launched in 2021, Click-and-Ride provides on-demand
public transit service throughout Plymouth, with limited service available to select destinations outside the city.

Trips to or from these designated external destinations must begin or end within Plymouth. The City of Plymouth contracts with First Transit to provide Click-and-Ride.

Click-and-Ride remains an active service. Service is available seven days a week, with hours varying by day. Riders can book trips on-demand or up to 30 days in advance using the Clickand-Ride mobile app, or by calling 763-559-5057. [11] [12] Flexible Zone-Based
Microtransit
AC Transit Flex
Alameda–Contra Costa
Transit District
(CA)
AC Transit Flex operates using small, accessible buses (ex. twelve-passenger) within designated zones in Newark,
Castro Valley, and Fremont. The program has been
established to replace low-ridership fixed routes while preserving ADA accessibility and Clipper Card fare
integration. Trips are scheduled via a mobile application or call center and are dynamically routed in real time.

AC Transit Flex was introduced in 2016. However, due to the pandemic, the service was suspended and remains
suspended while the district aims to restore service levels. [13]
Flexible Zone-Based
Microtransit
SacRT SmaRT Ride
Sacramento Regional
Transit District
(CA)
SacRT SmaRT Ride employs a similar zone-based model in
Sacramento County. Riders can use a smartphone app to
request a ride within each specific zone.

SmaRT Ride was discontinued in December 2024. The service concluded due to insufficient funding, low ridership, and elevated operating costs. It was replaced by the SacRT Flex program in January 2025. To utilize SacRT Flex, riders are required to apply and register in advance. Eligibility is limited to seniors, individuals with disabilities, low-income persons, or applicants representing minors (ages 13 to 17) from lowincome households. [14] [15]
Status
Active Service
Service Suspended
pg. 12

3.2 Technology and Operations
Dynamic routing and AI dispatch systems (Via, RideCo, TransLoc) enhance resource allocation.

Mobile applications facilitate real-time trip management and integrated payment solutions. Private technology providers, including Via, RideCo, and TransLoc, have been at the forefront of this innovation by implementing real-time algorithms and demand-prediction tools that improve vehicle utilization and decrease customer wait times.

3.3 Funding and Governance
Subsidy caps in the $5 - $9 range have been adopted by many agencies; however, fare and subsidy structures across microtransit and TNC-partnership programs remain quite varied.

Performance-based provisions are also frequently included in these contracts. Grants from the FTA MOD Sandbox and IMI programs can help offset early-stage costs for microtransit, particularly when services are deployed as part of broader integrated mobility strategies.

Additionally, shared-cost agreements with municipalities and employers facilitate financial sustainability.

3.4 Equity and Accessibility
Inclusive features include phone booking, cash fares, ADA vehicles, and multilingual training.

Community travel training and outreach are critical for Title VI compliance and user confidence.

3.5 Performance Metrics and Outcomes
Performance metrics offer tangible evidence of how microtransit systems operate in comparison to conventional fixed-route or demand-response services. Key indicators include trips per hour, subsidy per trip, technological platforms, and program outcomes. pg. 13

3.6 Comparative Assessment
Comparative assessments allow agencies to evaluate the effectiveness of different design, technological, and governance strategies across various microtransit programs. Comparing these features side by side helps understand the conditions where specific service models perform best, whether that’s focusing on cost efficiency, equity, technology integration, or regional scalability.

The following table reviews the services described in Table 3-1 by indicators such as subsidy per trip, technological platforms, and program outcomes (where publicly shared). It also provides an analysis of key takeaways from each project, sharing lessons learned where applicable or relevant.
pg. 14
Table 3-2. Summary of Microtransit Program Performance Metrics, Key Results and Lessons Learned Service Model Type Program / Agency
(State) Status Subsidy per Trip Technology Key Results / Lessons Learned Source(s) ADA Paratransit &
Microtransit (operated
via the same software)
SAM On Demand
Sioux Area Metro
(SD) Active N/A Via
SAM Transit is an agency that employs the same software for both paratransit and microtransit, enhancing overall network ejiciency and resource utilization. This configuration can allow for the sharing of reservationists and dispatchers across multiple services, should such sharing be desired.

Although training on service requirements remains necessary, utilizing the same software platform simplifies cross-training ejorts and allows agents to ejiciently handle bookings and dispatching for various services concurrently. [16] [17]
Employer / Destination
Shuttles
COTA GREAT Shuttle
Service
Central Ohio Transit
Authority
(OH)
Active Free to all riders N/A
A rider survey in 2017, conducted during a regional planning study, found that 56% of riders reported having no working vehicles at home, while 25% had one available. The service has been crucial in providing employees in the area with a safe means of commuting to and from work. [6] [18] Public–Private
Partnerships
PSTA Direct Connect
Pinellas Suncoast
Transit Authority
(FL)
Active
Up to $5 per trip for
Uber, Lyft, or United Taxi
Transit App, Uber, Lyft,
United Taxi, and
Wheelchair Transport
In the initial pilot phase, Direct Connect was launched with four designated stops across two zones (Pinellas Park and East Lake), offering a $3 subsidy per ride. By January 2017, the program was expanded to eight designated stops across the county and the subsidy was increased to $5 per trip.

This advancement enabled most riders to access nearby transit stops with an out-of-pocket expense of approximately $1. Today, Direct Connect has expanded to 26 locations across Pinellas County, supported by Uber, Lyft, United Taxi, and Wheelchair Transport. Current subsidies offer $5 off trips booked through Uber, Lyft, or United Taxi, and $25 off rides using Wheelchair Transport. The service operates daily from 5:00 a.m. to midnight, with discounts automatically applied through the Transit App, providing broad and consistent first- and last-mile mobility throughout the county.

Positive outcomes:
• 27% year-over-year growth in monthly ridership (7,211 trips vs. 5,666 last year) • 23% increase year-to-date, rising from 58,981 to 72,360 trips • Strong upward trend indicates expanding usage and growing rider awareness • Service locations increased from 4 to 26 - a 550% expansion in designated Direct Connect stops across Pinellas County. • Subsidy increased from $3 to $5 for standard rides - a 66% increase in the per-trip subsidy for Uber, Lyft, and United Taxi. [19] [1] [20]
Public–Private
Partnerships
GoMonrovia Lyft Pass
GoMonrovia
(CA)
Active
The passenger is
responsible for paying
the first $6.00, and
GoMonrovia will cover
up to $15.00 of the
remaining fare.

Lyft App
The City of Monrovia launched GoMonrovia in March 2018, in collaboration with Lyft and LimeBike, ojering subsidized on-demand ride-hailing and bicycle-sharing services. The GoMonrovia Lyft Pass continues to operate. During the fiscal year 2023-24, GoMonrovia completed a total of 162,310 trips, reflecting a 30 percent increase compared to the fiscal year 2022-2023. Furthermore, Monrovia Transit experienced an increase in its annual ridership, rising from 8,716 to 14,601. [8] [9] [21]
Public–Private
Partnerships
Southwest Prime
Southwest Transit
(MN)
Active
SW Prime ojers a range
of fare and subsidy
options, including
discounted fares for
trips associated with
partner institutions,
reduced fares for
essential trips such as
grocery access, and
fully subsidized fares for
select medical trips,
depending on the
specific service and
partnership.

SpareLabs
Key outcomes from SW Prime highlight the ejectiveness of a partnership-driven service model. Collaborations with employers, commercial centers, grocery retailers, and medical institutions helped reduce fares for specific rider groups and, in some cases, fully subsidize trips, improving ajordability and access. Partnerships also expanded vehicle availability and service flexibility by integrating multiple vehicle and driver providers, Transdev, May Mobility, and Lyft based on the needs of specific trip types, such as airport travel or localized service zones. Overall, SW Prime demonstrates how strategic partnerships can enhance mobility options while aligning service design, pricing, and capacity with community and institutional needs. [10] [11]
Public–Private
Partnerships
Click-and-Ride
Plymouth Metrolink
Plymouth
(MN)
Active Click-and-Ride fares are
$3 per trip. RideCo Inc
Launched in 2019, Click-and-Ride serves as an example of how on-demand, shared-ride transit can support community mobility when initiated through a transit operating budget. The service demonstrates the value of flexible service delivery and the use of contracted providers, such as First Transit for vehicles and drivers, to provide reliable transit operations. [11] [12] pg. 15
Service Model Type Program / Agency
(State) Status Subsidy per Trip Technology Key Results / Lessons Learned Source(s) Flexible Zone-Based
Microtransit
AC Transit Flex
Alameda–Contra Costa
Transit District
(CA)
Service
Suspended N/A DemandTrans
AC Transit evaluated the viability of on-demand service in very low-density areas to see if it could maintain or lower costs while improving mobility and freeing resources for higher-frequency fixed routes. Conducted across two zones—one replacing a fixed route and the other adding to existing services - the pilot demonstrated high rider satisfaction but also highlighted clear productivity limitations that restricted its scalability. In 2018 an article was published by the Transit Center, that shared the following performance metrics regarding AC Transit Flex service:

Positive outcomes:
• Over 700 riders used AC Transit Flex, completing 23,000 trips, with 70% returning after their first ride. • On-time performance improved despite dynamically changing routes. • Rider satisfaction was notably high: 94% preferred Flex over restoring the fixed route, and 70% indicated they would increase their usage of AC Transit if Flex services were expanded.

Performance challenges:
• Productivity averaged 3 passengers per hour, less than half of the fixed route it replaced • The reservation requirement reduced demand, with 40% more trips starting at BART (where no reservation was needed) than ending there (where one was required). This pattern indicates many riders avoided making reservations altogether. [22] [13]
Flexible Zone-Based
Microtransit
SacRT SmaRT Ride
Sacramento Regional
Transit District
(CA)
Service
Suspended N/A
TransLoc (early SmaRT
Ride pilot)
Via Transportation (later /
primary vendor during
mature operations)
SmaRT Ride was discontinued in December 2024. The service concluded due to insujicient funding, low ridership, and elevated operating costs. It was replaced by the SacRT Flex program in January 2025. To utilize SacRT Flex, riders are required to apply and register in advance. Eligibility is limited to seniors, individuals with disabilities, low-income persons, or applicants representing minors (ages 13 to 17) from low-income households. [23] [24] pg. 16
4 Emerging Trends

4.1 Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) Integration
Mobility-as-a-Service (MaaS) platforms integrate planning, reservation, and payment processes across various transportation modalities within a single application. Notable examples include Dallas Area Rapid Transit’s (DART) GoPass and Vamos Mobility in California’s San Joaquin Valley. These platforms facilitate multimodal coordination, uninterrupted fare transactions, and comprehensive trip planning.

Artificial Intelligence and Data-Driven Operations
AI-enabled platforms from Via, RideCo, and TransLoc support transit agencies by improving demand responsiveness, optimizing routing decisions, and identifying service gaps through datadriven planning and real-time analytics.

4.2 Regional Coordination and Interagency Partnerships
Regional coordination improves cost efficiency and enhances the user experience through the support of consistent branding and fare reciprocity. The implementation of shared procurement processes, standardization of data, and interagency collaboration contribute to the reduction of redundant administrative and technological costs. A notable example is the NEORide consortium spanning multiple Midwestern states.

4.3 Autonomous and Connected Vehicle Pilots
Emerging autonomous and connected vehicle pilots are currently evaluating the integration of microtransit services within controlled environments. The Bishop Ranch Shuttle in San Ramon, California, demonstrates that electric vehicles are capable of safely facilitating short, first/last-mile journeys. As illustrated below, the PRESTO Bishop Ranch Shuttle operated on a continuous loop from Monday to Friday, from 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM. This pilot program, running from February 2023 to July 2025, has offered more than 2,000 free rides to people in San Ramon [25]. These initiatives demonstrate the prospective potential for small urban transit systems to mitigate operator shortages and attain sustainability objectives, contingent upon the resolution of regulatory and liability concerns considerations.
pg. 17
Figure 4-1. PRESTO Bishop Ranch Shuttle Loop [26]

4.4 Equity and Inclusion Innovations
Modern microtransit emphasizes inclusive design by offering various booking options, using cash and stored-value fare systems, and ensuring fleets are ADA-accessible. In addition, collaborations with the community and local organizations show that co-designed mobility efforts can effectively reduce social and geographic isolation, boosting trust and adoption. A notable example being the Green Raiteros program described in Section 5.3. pg. 18
5 Targeted Applications and Regional
Profiles

5.1 Fixed-Route Replacement Models
As agencies confront declining ridership and increasing costs on underperforming fixed routes, many are exploring on-demand microtransit as a strategic alternative. Replacing fixed routes allows agencies to maintain geographic coverage while providing more adaptable, customerresponsive services in low-density corridors. These models typically emerge in contexts where fixed routes attract fewer than ten boardings per hour, have limited first/last-mile connections, or exhibit overlapping paratransit coverage. The following examples illustrate how agencies have implemented replacement programs to improve efficiency, reduce subsidy costs per trip, and better align service supply with actual travel demand.

Figure 5-1. Wilson, NC – RIDE by Via - Popular Destinations [27] pg. 19
Table 5-1. Summary of Fixed-Route Replacement Microtransit Programs and Key Performance Outcomes Agency / Location Status Program Description Service Metrics / Outcomes Source(s) RIDE (by Via)
Wilson, NC Active
The city switched from a fixed-route bus
network to a fully on-demand system
operated by Via in 2020. An individual
ride is $2.50.

A 2021 study indicated that Wilson’s RIDE microtransit system averaged approximately 2,700 trips per week, compared to fewer than 1,400 trips per week on the fixed route service it replaced. The study also reported that the average wait time was approximately 15 minutes from the moment a rider books a trip until the vehicle's arrival. This duration was significantly shorter than the wait times associated with traditional dial-a-ride services, which often require 24 to 48 hours of advance booking. [28] [29] [30] [31]
Arlington OnDemand (formally
known as Via OnDemand)
Arlington, TX
Active
Arlington transitioned from a single
fixed-route line to a microtransit service
operated by Via commencing in 2017.

Fares are based on distance traveled.

By 2021, it was reported that the service had completed approximately 494,000 total rides since its launch. Overall, the agency has experienced a tenfold increase in public transit ridership since the site's launch. In December 2017, the agency started operations with an initial fleet of 18 vehicles in a designated reduced zone in Arlington.

Since then, the fleet has increased to 53 vehicles, with plans to expand soon to 68 vehicles covering the entire city. Arlington has become the first city to operate entirely on microtransit. This example demonstrates how gradually expanding from a single corridor to the entire network can boost ridership, increase public awareness, and build institutional trust.
[28] [32] [33]
Fixed-route replacements exemplify how on-demand microtransit can sustain coverage while significantly enhancing cost efficiency and customer satisfaction. The effectiveness hinges on transparent performance reporting, clear communication with riders during the transition process, and adaptive contracting strategies to refine service zones as travel patterns change. For small urban agencies, these case studies underscore the significance of phased implementation, multimodal integration, and flexible fare policies to guarantee equitable and financially sustainable results. pg. 20

5.2 Microtransit for Students
High School and District Applications
Student-centered mobility programs represent a notable and growing implementation of microtransit principles within the United States. These services use the same flexible, technologyenabled approach that supports public on-demand transit, including customized routing, smaller vehicles, and real-time tracking, to address the specific requirements of K–12 and higher education students. Programs like HopSkipDrive and EverDriven have direct contracts with school districts and sometimes other education agencies to provide transportation for students who cannot be served by traditional yellow-bus services.

HopSkipDrive
HopSkipDrive, founded in Los Angeles in 2014, now serves over 600 districts and county education offices across 13 states, including California, Colorado, Texas, and Washington. Its centralized scheduling and tracking platform, RideIQ, offers real-time visibility to all individuals responsible for supporting the rider, which can be accessed via web, mobile application, or SMS.

HopSkipDrive utilizes RouteWise AI to enhance routing software. This system assists in mitigating bus driver shortages by designing routes with high ridership potential, lowering emissions through monitoring carbon impact, and rerouting to more efficient paths when feasible. Additionally, it facilitates effective planning by incorporating school-specific details such as bell schedules times.

HopSkipDrive can fill transportation gaps that conventional services often miss. It allows for trips to be scheduled just a few hours in advance, supporting youth experiencing homelessness and those in foster care, especially during sudden placement changes and helping districts meet McKinney-Vento requirements. This quick response eliminates transportation barriers that could prevent students from staying in their original schools. Such flexibility helps maintain school stability, reduces attendance gaps, and minimizes disruptions for students during stressful transitions.

EverDriven
Similarly, EverDriven Technologies, founded in the early 2000s in Orange County, California, and now headquartered in Colorado, provides transportation for students across hundreds of school districts. It currently operates in 36 states. EverDriven utilizes their District Portal as a centralized platform to enable school districts to request and manage Alternative Student Transportation efficiently. The portal provides flexible scheduling tools and vital insights. EverDriven reports that 90% of trips arrive within 5 minutes of schedule, and 99.63% of trips were completed successfully in the last 12 months.
pg. 21
These programs collectively demonstrate how microtransit concepts such as on-demand routing, smaller vehicles, and data-guided service management can transform student transportation. Both systems illustrate that flexible contracting and technological oversight can broaden access for students with specific needs and minimize administrative burdens for districts.

Figure 5-2. HopSkipDrive's Website – RideIQ [34]
Higher-Education Applications
In the postsecondary environment, universities have adopted microtransit and multimodal services to enhance campus mobility and safety. For instance, the University of Southern California offers Lyft Rides free to current students, faculty, and staff, though these rides are limited to specific zones and must be requested within set time frames. The University of California San Diego has partnered with Transloc to implement advanced fixed-route technology, while Spin provides e-bike and e-scooter sharing services. Additionally, UC San Diego has partnered with Lyft to offer on-demand late-night transportation, with a maximum of $10 per ride. Each quarter, students receive a set number of $10 ride credits for late-night trips starting or ending on campus.

These programs demonstrate the versatility of on-demand transit concepts across diverse educational settings, rendering them particularly pertinent for small-urban college towns where demand is spread out and resources are constrained. Microtransit-style student transportation highlights the potential of technology, flexible contracting, and tailored service design to promote equity and efficiency in both K–12 and higher education systems. pg. 22

5.3 Migrant and Agricultural Worker Mobility
Microtransit and community-based mobility initiatives have become essential tools for improving access within agricultural regions where traditional fixed-route transit systems are inadequate. In California’s Central Valley and similar rural regions, migrant and seasonal farmworkers often face significant distances to work sites, facing limited public transportation options along with challenges related to language and digital literacy. As a result, local nonprofits, community organizations, and public agencies have established flexible, equity-focused mobility programs designed to meet the specific travel patterns and needs of these populations. The following table offers examples of prominent migrant-focused and agricultural worker transportation programs, highlighting their operational models, important lessons, and key insights relevant to microtransit implementations in rural areas with specific demographic needs. pg. 23
Table 5-2. Summary of Migrant and Agricultural Worker Mobility Programs and Key Lessons Learned Program / Location Status Program Description Key Lessons / Takeaways Source(s) Green Raiteros
Huron, CA
Active
Launched in 2018, the Green Raiteros program shows how
community-led ejorts and electric vehicles can improve mobility access, cut emissions, and build trust within farmworker communities. The initiative is based on Huron’s historic raiteros system, an informal network where trusted community members provided essential rides for farmworkers, ensuring that new mobility services stay culturally relevant and rooted in community traditions. By formalizing this informal but important Indigenous rideshare network, Green Raiteros provides a modern, sustainable version of a deeply rooted tradition.

Green Raiteros demonstrates that community-driven
models can effectively address rural transportation
inequities by respecting local history and social dynamics.

Utilizing trusted community networks facilitates the rapid adoption of new services, while integrating these networks with environmentally friendly transportation technologies can yield social and environmental advantages. The program indicates that rural mobility solutions can achieve optimal success when they incorporate cultural relevance,
community trust, and sustainability from the beginning. [35]
[36] [37]
CalVans (California Vanpool
Authority)
(formally known as Agricultural
Industries Transportation Services,
AITS)
CA
Active
AITS began in 2002 as a pilot project to provide safe and reliable transportation for agricultural workers. After regulatory updates and a federal agreement in 2016, the program was integrated into CalVans as its dedicated agricultural and farmworker vanpool model. The promising pilot grew into a permanent program once it was ojicially established as a statewide-regulated and regionally managed system, which has been able to ojer ongoing support for the mission.

The program demonstrates how integrating a cooperative
governance model within a statewide-regulated, regionally managed framework can create a service that is both
scalable and sustainable.
[38]
These programs collectively highlight the importance of community trust, cultural competency, and flexible service design in improving mobility for migrant and agricultural workers. Electrified fleets, supported by environmental and sustainability grants, further enhance cost efficiency and resilience. These models demonstrate that community engagement can significantly contribute to the success of microtransit programs.
pg. 24

5.4 Microtransit in California’s Central Valley
California’s Central Valley has emerged as a prominent area for testing and expanding microtransit initiatives within small urban and rural settings. The region’s extensive geography, agricultural sector, and scattered population hubs provide optimal conditions for adaptable, technology-driven service models. Several regional agencies and joint powers authorities have initiated on-demand programs or undertaken feasibility studies to evaluate how microtransit can address first- and last-mile connectivity and link low-density regions. The table below shows several Microtransit Programs at different development stages, from initial planning and feasibility assessments to active service operation.

Figure 5-3. San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD) – Van Go! [39] pg. 25
Table 5-3 Summary of Microtransit Programs and Regional Coordination Efforts in California’s Central Valley.

Agency / Location Status Program Description Key Lessons / Takeaways / Service Updates Source(s) Van Go!
San Joaquin
Regional Transit
District (RTD)
(CA)
Active
Van Go! is a pilot rideshare service accessible
via app. Bookings can be made through a
smartphone or computer. It’s designed to
connect underserved areas, including rural
San Joaquin County, offering flexible trips
such as social outings, shopping, and casual
trips. Since vehicle availability is limited, the
service functions on a first-come, first-served
basis. Riders pay $4 per person for the initial 5
miles and $0.50 for each additional mile
Van Go! demonstrated that on-demand transit
can enhance regional mobility in low-density
regions; however, it encountered challenges
with low ridership and elevated operating costs
in urban areas. Consequently, the service has
been scaled back to concentrate on rural trips
where it provides the greatest value and
operates more sustainably.
[40] [41]
[42]
Dial-A-Ride
Kern Transit
(CA)
Active
Reservation-based, curb-to-curb demandresponsive service provided by Kern Transit in various communities throughout Kern
County. Passengers are required to call in
advance to reserve their trips, and the service
is limited to designated service areas only.

Kern Transit is currently implementing Mobility
by Ecolane, which will enable online scheduling
and real-time availability for Dial-A-Ride and
associated services. Kern Transit illustrates how
beginning with basic microtransit features such
as reservation-based, curb-to-curb trips
bookable only by phone can help an agency both
acclimate to operating the service and better
understand and refine rider needs. As the agency
gains experience, it can gradually integrate
additional elements, such as technology that
enables online scheduling and real-time
availability. This phased approach supports a
smooth transition while building a stronger
understanding of passenger needs and
enhancing service over time.
[43] [44]
[45]
Regional
Microtransit
Feasibility Study
Fresno Council of
Governments
(Fresno COG)
(CA)
N/A
The Regional Microtransit Feasibility Study
(2023) was conducted to evaluate whether
microtransit could be a viable and sustainable
model for local transportation in select areas
of the County.

The study evaluates 12 potential microtransit
opportunity zones to determine their feasibility
for microtransit operations. Conducting a
feasibility study prior to the implementation of
microtransit is essential to ensure that the
service is appropriately tailored to community
needs, operationally viable, and financially
sustainable
[46]
Visalia Connect
City of Visalia /
Visalia Transit Active
Visalia Transit launched Visalia Connect in
June 2025, providing a flexible microtransit
service across Visalia through a mobile
application. The service operates within a
single zone for a fee of $5 per trip per person.
during the same hours as Visalia Transit’s
fixed routes to ensure consistency and
coverage across the city. Its primary objective
is to supplement the existing public
transportation system by enhancing mobility
options, particularly in regions with limited
fixed-route services or for passengers
requiring greater flexibility.

Visalia illustrates how microtransit can serve as
a complementary layer within an existing transit
system instead of operating as a separate
service. By aligning service hours and
implementing a straightforward fare system, the
agency offers a smooth and user-friendly
experience for passengers. This strategy shows
how transit agencies can increase coverage and
flexibility while supporting, rather than
competing with, fixed-route services.
[47]
For smaller urban agencies, these efforts emphasize the importance of feasibility planning, regional coordination, and adaptable vendor partnerships to promote equitable and affordable mobility. Additionally, these programs demonstrate that understanding rider needs and careful planning are crucial for successful implementation. Regular performance assessments are also key to determining whether scaling operations up or down is necessary to meet shifting community demands.
pg. 26
6 Conclusions and Recommendations

6.1 Key Findings
Microtransit has emerged as a crucial element within the modern mobility landscape, especially in small urban and suburban areas where traditional fixed-route services often struggle to meet coverage and efficiency goals. A review of national studies, federal research, and regional case studies shows that, when carefully planned and well-managed, microtransit can dramatically improve accessibility, cost-effectiveness, and rider satisfaction. Several consistent themes emerge throughout the research and programs reviewed, as well as across established industry standards.
• Defined service zones tailored to community demand.

Clearly defining service zones and operating hours based on demand data is essential for creating an effective service. Setting geographic boundaries and service hours through data analysis prevents oversaturation and ensures vehicles remain productive throughout the day.
• Robust technology supporting dynamic dispatch and data monitoring.

Real-time routing, automated scheduling, and integrated performance dashboards enable agencies to effectively manage demand fluctuations, monitor wait times, and track productivity metrics. Furthermore, these systems facilitate simplified reporting and contract management more easily.
• Inclusive design emphasizing accessibility.

Programs that integrate mobile application booking with telephone and cash payment options guarantee equitable access for older adults, individuals without smartphones, and those with limited English proficiency. ADA-compliant vehicles and integrated paratransit systems continue to be fundamental to compliance with Title VI and adherence to universal design principles.
• Transparent, performance-based partnerships.

Agencies that mandate regular data reporting can implement evidence-based adjustments, thereby enhancing accountability and value for money. Contracts with technology providers commonly define and monitor performance metrics such as cost per passenger, per vehicle hour, and shared ride rate. These metrics are used to evaluate vendor performance and inform contract renewal, expansion, or termination decisions, effectively aligning technology partnerships with measurable service outcomes. pg. 27
• Regional collaboration and interoperability.

Multi-agency partnerships such as NEORide facilitate joint procurement, standardized branding, and integrated fare collection systems. These strategies enhance cost efficiency, minimize administrative redundancy, and provide a more cohesive experience for passengers traversing different jurisdictions.

Overall, these findings show that microtransit is not just a temporary solution but can serve as a sustainable alternative or complement to fixed-route systems when designed with community needs, performance data, and equitable access principles in mind.

Policy and Implementation Recommendations
Transitioning from pilot projects to long-term operations requires careful policy alignment, performance tracking, and often regional collaboration. The following suggestions aim to assist small-urban transit agencies, MPOs, and partner jurisdictions in planning and implementing sustainable microtransit services. It is crucial to set measurable service goals and performance metrics. Establish clear benchmarks for ridership, trip cost, wait times, and customer satisfaction before launching. Monitoring these indicators allows agencies to assess performance and support ongoing investment. An examination of relevant research and comparable programs highlights several core principles, as described below:
• Prioritize inclusivity and accessibility.

Maintain multiple booking channels, including telephone and in-person options, and guarantee the availability of ADA-compliant vehicles are available in all zones. Incorporate cash acceptance and multilingual outreach from the outset to promote equitable participation.
• Leverage regional partnerships for technology and branding.

Shared platforms and cooperative procurement models lower technology costs and promote interoperability among agencies. Regional integration also makes travel easier for riders crossing service boundaries.
• Align microtransit with education, workforce, and social service programs Engage with school districts, colleges, and workforce development agencies to cofinance or coordinate mobility programs. These collaborations enhance access to essential destinations while distributing costs among multiple funding sources. • Adopt open data and interoperability standards.

Implement data formats to enable real-time tracking, performance monitoring, and integration with regional mobility platforms. Using open data standards promotes transparency and ensures consistent long-term planning. pg. 28
• Incorporate environmental and sustainability goals.

Pursue opportunities to upgrade fleets via collaborations with utility providers and environmental funding initiatives. Electric and hybrid vehicles decrease operating expenses and adhere to state and federal carbon reduction objectives. • Use phased implementation to balance innovation and risk.

Commence with restricted pilot zones or specific corridors, expanding services only upon reaching established performance benchmarks. Phased development enables agencies to refine technology, governance, and communication strategies prior to broader implementation.
• Communicate performance transparently to stakeholders.

Regularly publish key performance indicators and public dashboards to foster accountability and enhance community trust. Transparent reporting guarantees alignment between service outcomes and policy objectives.

In conclusion, microtransit demonstrates a practical, flexible, and scalable approach for smallurban transit systems seeking to modernize. The experiences of different agencies across the United States show that success depends not only on technology but also on how agencies set goals, work with partners, and create inclusive service models. By grounding innovation in clear performance metrics, equity principles, and regional collaboration, microtransit can serve as a sustainable base for resilient, interconnected, and community-centered public transportation.

6.2 Relevance to Madera
Madera operates within a small urban service area characterized by dispersed travel patterns, moderate demand densities, and an increasing necessity for adaptable, first- and last-mile mobility solutions. The findings of this report are relevant to Madera’s ongoing initiatives to improve current demand-response services and to further support mobility within the region.

Insights from peer systems suggest that strategies such as zone-based microtransit, integration with existing paratransit and fixed-route networks, and the implementation of shared technology platforms may offer potential advantages that warrant further investigation. It is recommended that Madera evaluate these and other service models, analyzing how on-demand approaches could complement existing operations. Collaboration with regional partners, including neighboring transit agencies, metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), and educational or workforce institutions, should also be considered to coordinate technological investments and leverage funding opportunities. An ongoing assessment of these strategies would enable Madera to make informed decisions regarding the deployment of flexible, data-driven mobility services aligned with its long-term goals of efficiency, accessibility, and community-oriented transportation. pg. 29
7 Bibliography
[1] Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA), "Direct Connect," 31 October 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.psta.net/services/direct-connect/. [2] Sioux Area Metro, "Paratransit Services," Sioux Area Metro, 2025 (or n.d. if undated). [Online]. Available: https://siouxareametro.info/paratransit. [Accessed December 11 2025].
[3] Sioux Area Metro, "On-Demand Service," 2025 (or “n.d.” if no date is shown — confirm if you prefer n.d.). [Online]. Available: https://siouxareametro.info/on-demand. [Accessed December 11 2025].
[4] Via Transportation, "What Is Commingling: Integrating Demand-Response and Paratransit," Via Transportation, 2025. [Online]. Available:
https://ridewithvia.com/resources/what-is-commingling-integrating-demand-responseand-paratransit. [Accessed 11 December 2025]. [5] City of Groveport, "GREAT Shuttle Brochure," City of Groveport, n.d.. [Online].

Available: https://www.groveport.org/DocumentCenter/View/4900/GREAT-Brochure-. [Accessed December 2025].
[6] Central Ohio Transit Authority (COTA), "GREAT Workforce Transportation," Central Ohio Transit Authority, 2025. [Online]. Available: https://www.cota.com/services/greatworkforce-transportation/. [Accessed 11 December 2025]. [7] Hill International, "Rickenbacker Area Mobility Center (RAMC)," Hill International, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://www.hillintl.com/project/rickenbacker-area-mobility-centerramc/. [Accessed December 2025]. [8] B. Haugaard, "Lyft Price for Riders May Increase," Monrovia Now, November 2024. [Online]. Available: https://www.monrovianow.com/2024/11/lyft-price-for-riders-mayincrease.html. [Accessed 2025]. [9] City of Monrovia, "GoMonrovia," City of Monrovia, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.monroviaca.gov/your-government/publicworks/transportation/gomonrovia#The%20GoMonrovia%20Lyft%20Pass. [Accessed 2025].
[10] SouthWest Transit, "SW Prime (On-demand Rideshare)," [Online]. Available:
https://swtransit.org/sw-prime/. [Accessed 2026].
pg. 30
[11] Kimley-Horn, "Peer Microtransit Case Studies Report," October 2024. [Online].

Available: https://baltometro.org/wpcontent/uploads/files/bmc_documents/general/transportation/transit/MicrotransitSolutions%20_Peer-Case-Studies-Report.pdf. [Accessed January 2026]. [12] City of Plymouth Minnesota, "City of Plymouth Minnesota," [Online]. Available:
https://www.plymouthmn.gov/departments/administrative-services-/transit. [Accessed 2026].
[13] AC Transit, "AC Transit Flex," AC Transit, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.actransit.org/planning/ac-transit-flex. [Accessed 2025]. [14] A. R. Harvey, "Sacramento Regional Transit Flex Service," The Sacramento Observer, December 2024. [Online]. Available: https://sacobserver.com/2024/12/sacramentoregional-transit-flex/. [Accessed 2025]. [15] Sacramento Regional Transit (SacRT), "SmaRT Ride On-Demand Microtransit," Sacramento Regional Transit, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://www.sacrt.com/visualcomposer-13850/. [Accessed 2025]. [16] Via Transportation, "What Is Commingling? Integrating Demand-Response and Paratransit," Via Transportation, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://ridewithvia.com/resources/what-is-commingling-integrating-demand-responseand-paratransit. [Accessed 2025]. [17] Sioux Area Metro, "On-Demand Service," Sioux Area Metro, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://siouxareametro.info/on-demand. [Accessed 2025]. [18] Mid-Ohio Regional Planning Commission (MORPC), "GREAT Survey Results," MidOhio Regional Planning Commission, January January 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://www.morpc.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/01/GREAT-Survey-Results.pdf. [Accessed 2025].
[19] Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA), "Updated Board Report – September 2025," Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority, September 2025. [Online]. Available:
https://psta.net/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/UPDATED-Board-Report-September2025.pdf. [Accessed 2025]. [20] Shared-Use Mobility Center, "Direct Connect Program – Pinellas County, Florida (2016)," Shared-Use Mobility Center, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://learn.sharedusemobilitycenter.org/overview/direct-connect-program-pinellascounty-florida-2016/. [Accessed 2025]. pg. 31
[21] The American Public Transportation Association (APTA), "City of Monrovia: Leveraging emerging ridesharing services to expand mobility options," NTi, [Online]. Available:
https://www.apta.com/wpcontent/uploads/Resources/resources/mobility/Documents/GoMonrovia%20Case%20St udy.pdf. [Accessed 2025].
[22] M. Buchanan, "Adding Flexible Routes to Improve the Fixed-Route Network," TransitCenter, 12 December 2023. [Online]. Available: https://transitcenter.org/addingflexible-routes-improve-fixed-route-network/. [Accessed 2025]. [23] TransLoc, "TransLoc’s New On-Demand Microtransit Model Sees Broad Adoption by Transit Agencies Nationwide," TransLoc, 22 February 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://transloc.com/press/translocs-new-on-demand-microtransit-model-sees-broadadoption-by-transit-agencies-nationwide/. [Accessed 2025]. [24] Via Transportation, "Via and SacRT Launch the Largest Microtransit System in America," Via Transportation, 28 January 2021. [Online]. Available:
https://ridewithvia.com/news/via-and-sacrt-launch-the-largest-microtransit-system-inamerica. [Accessed 2025]. [25] PRESTO by CCTA, "Autonomous Shuttles in Contra Costa County," PRESTO by CCTA, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://ridepresto.com/bishop-ranch/. [Accessed 2025]. [26] Contra Costa Transportation Authority (CCTA), "PRESTO Bishop Ranch," 2023. [Online]. Available: https://ridepresto.com/bishop-ranch/. [Accessed 4 November 2025]. [27] City of Wilson / Wilson Transit System, "RIDE Wilson by Via (or “RIDE – Wilson’s ondemand micro-transit service”)," [Online]. Available: https://city.ridewithvia.com/ridewilson. [Accessed 5 November 2025]. [28] RideCo, "VIA Link Case Study," RideCo, Inc., Toronto, ON, 2023. [29] National Center for Applied Transit Technology (N-CATT), "Microtransit Implementation Guidebook," National Center for Applied Transit Technology, Washington, D.C., 2023. [30] Via Transportation, "How 10 Transit Agencies and Cities Found Funding to Build and Grow Turnkey Microtransit Services," Via Transportation, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://ridewithvia.com/resources/how-10-transit-agencies-and-cities-found-funding-tobuild-and-grow-turnkey-microtransit-services. [Accessed 2025]. [31] AASHTO Innovation Initiative (AII), "Wilson Microtransit Summary," AASHTO Innovation Initiative, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://aii.transportation.org/Documents/Wilson_Microtransit_Summary.pdf. pg. 32
[32] Via Transportation, "Via Arlington: On-Demand Public Transit at Citywide Scale," Via Transportation, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://ridewithvia.com/case-study/via-arlington. [Accessed 2025].
[33] "Microtransit is a critical part of an integrated, all-encompassing transit system:," [Online]. Available:
https://www.summitcountyutah.gov/DocumentCenter/View/15678/MicroTransit#:~:text=From%20its%20transit%2Daverse%20roots,more%20than%20400%2C 000%20vehicle%20miles..
[34] HopSkipDrive, "Morning Ride interface – Los Angeles," 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://www.hopskipdrive.com/_next/image/?url=%E2%80%A6. [Accessed 4 November 2025].
[35] Valley LEAP & Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, "Green Raiteros and Van y Vienen Pilot Reports," Valley LEAP & Leadership Counsel for Justice and Accountability, Fresno, CA, 2019.
[36] Shared-Use Mobility Center, "Green Raitero and Green Riderz: Shared Rides in Huron, CA," Shared-Use Mobility Center, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://learn.sharedusemobilitycenter.org/casestudy/green-raitero-and-green-riderzshared-rides-in-huron-ca/. [37] J. Malloy, "Green Raiteros: Sustainable and Affordable Transportation in California’s Central Valley," Shared-Use Mobility Center, 17 January 2018. [Online]. Available:
https://sharedusemobilitycenter.org/green-raiteros-sustainable-and-affordabletransportation-in-californias-central-valley/. [Accessed 2025]. [38] California Vanpool Authority (CalVans), "History," California Vanpool Authority, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://calvans.gov/history. [Accessed 2025]. [39] HopSkipDrive, "Morning Ride interface – Los Angeles," 2023. [Online]. Available:
https://www.hopskipdrive.com/_next/image/?url=. [Accessed 4 November 2025]. [40] San Joaquin Regional Transit District, "Van Go! Program Overview," San Joaquin Regional Transit District, Stockton, CA, 2023.
[41] San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD), "Van Go!," San Joaquin Regional Transit District, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://sanjoaquinrtd.com/van-go/. [Accessed 2025]. [42] San Joaquin Regional Transit District (RTD), "RTD Announces Discontinuation of Van Go! Service Within City of Stockton," San Joaquin Regional Transit District, 1 August 2024. [Online]. Available: https://sanjoaquinrtd.com/wp-content/uploads/rtd- pg. 33
pdf/2024/07/Press-Release-20240801-RTD-Announces-Discontinuation-of-Van-GoService-Within-City-of-Stockton.pdf. [Accessed 2025]. [43] Kern Transit, "Rural On-Demand Service Expansion Overview," Kern Transit, Bakersfield, CA, 2023.
[44] Kern Transit, "Mobile Apps and Websites," Kern Transit, n.d.. [Online]. Available: Mobile Apps and Websites. [Accessed 2025].
[45] Kern Transit, "Frequently Asked Questions," Kern Transit, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://kerntransit.org/how-to-ride/frequently-asked-questions/. [Accessed 2025]. [46] Fresno Council of Governments, "Regional Microtransit Feasibility Study," Fresno Council of Governments, Fresno, CA, 2023.
[47] "The City of Visalia, Visalia Connect," [Online]. Available:
https://www.visalia.gov/358/Visalia-Connect. [Accessed 26 March 2026]. [48] Federal Transit Administration, "Annual Research Report FY2024," U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2024.
[49] Transit Cooperative Research Program, "TCRP Synthesis 178: Microtransit Solutions in Rural Communities—On-Demand Alternatives to Dial-a-Ride Services and Unproductive Coverage Routes," Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2023.
[50] Federal Transit Administration, "Providing a Dynamic, Data-Driven Microtransit Service with Smart Dispatch Using Artificial Intelligence (Report No. 0269)," U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C., 2023.
[51] Federal Transit Administration, "Transforming Public Transit with a Rural On-Demand Microtransit Project (Report No. 0243)," U.S. Department of Transportation, Washington, D.C, 2021.
[52] S. Feigon and C. Murphy, "Broadening Understanding of the Interplay Between Public Transit, Shared Mobility, and Personal Automobiles (TCRP Research Report 195)," Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2018.
[53] Transit Cooperative Research Program, "Modernizing Rural Transit’s Toolbox:

Microtransit as a Strategy to Achieve High-Quality Coverage Service in Rural Areas," Transportation Research Board, Washington, D.C., 2022.
[54] Via Transportation, "On-Demand Microtransit Annual Report," Via Transportation, Inc., New York, NY, 2022.
pg. 34
[55] Merced County Association of Governments, "The Bus: Flexible Service Integration Plan," Merced County Association of Governments, Merced, CA, 2023. [56] HopSkipDrive, "District Transportation Case Studies," HopSkipDrive, Inc., Los Angeles, CA, 2023.
[57] Orange County Transportation Authority (OCTA), "Community-Based Circulators (CTFP Call for Projects)," Orange County Transportation Authority, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.octa.net/programs-projects/programs/funding-programs/call-forprojects/ctfp/community-based-circulators. [Accessed December 2025]. [58] AP, "Schools are cutting bus service for children. Parents are turning to ride-hailing apps," AP, 16 December 2024. [Online]. Available: https://apnews.com/article/schoolbus-rideshare-chicago-3fdcedfc4f957f748bf109066806bc88. [Accessed 2025]. [59] HopSkipDrive, "Safe, Flexible Transportation for McKinney-Vento and Foster Care," HopSkipDrive, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://www.hopskipdrive.com/mckinney-ventofoster-youth-transportation/. [Accessed 2025]. [60] HopSkipDrive, "HopSkipDrive," HopSkipDrive, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.hopskipdrive.com/blog/hopskipdrive-rideiq-the-future-of-safe-youthtransportation/. [Accessed 2025]. [61] EverDriven, "Student Transportation Solutions," EverDriven, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.everdriven.com/about/. [Accessed 2025].
[62] EverDriven, "Manage Alternative Student Transportation With Confidence," EverDrive, n.d.. [Online]. Available: https://www.everdriven.com/technology/district-portal/. [Accessed 2025].
[63] USCTransportation, "USC Lyft Rides Program," USCTransportation, n.d.. [Online].

Available: https://transnet.usc.edu/index.php/how-to-use-lyft/. [Accessed 2025]. [64] Transloc, "Groundbreaking Multimodal Transit Ecosystem," Transloc, n.d.. [Online].

Available: https://transloc.com/case-studies/university-of-california-san-diego/. [Accessed 2025].
[65] UCSanDiego, "Overview and Program Highlights," UCSanDiego, n.d.. [Online].

Available: https://ipps.ucsd.edu/cpp/partners/Lyft.html. [Accessed 2025]. [66] B. F. a. J. Hillman, "Reason Foundation," Reason Foundation, December 2020. [Online]. Available: https://reason.org/wp-content/uploads/how-to-guide-contractingmass-transit.pdf. [Accessed 2025]. pg. 35
[67] National Aging and Disability Transportation Center, "Leveraging Technology and Share Resources," ational Aging and Disability Transportation Center, November 2016. [Online]. Available: https://www.nadtc.org/news/blog/leveraging-technology-andsharing-resources/. [Accessed 2025]. [68] Transit Center, "No Go Zone: Behind the Plan to Shrink the Bus System in Denton, Texas," Transit Center, 21 July 2021. [Online]. Available: https://transitcenter.org/no-gozone-behind-the-plan-to-shrink-the-bus-system-in-denton-texas/. [Accessed 2025]. [69] RideCo, "RideCo Launched AI Agent!," RideCO, 2025. [Online]. Available:
https://www.rideco.com/.
[70] Via, "The intelligence to see your city. The power to move it.," Via, n.d.. [Online].

Available: https://ridewithvia.com/via-intelligence-ai-platform. [71] TransLoc, "Solutions Overview," TransLoc, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://transloc.com/solutions/. [Accessed 2025].
[72] GoPass, "About GoPass," GoPass, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://www.gopass.org/gopass/about. [Accessed 2025].
[73] VAMOS, "One App to Ride them All," VAMOS, n.d.. [Online]. Available:
https://vamosmobility.com/. [Accessed 2025].
pg. 95
Appendix C. Outreach Summary Report
Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study
Outreach Summary Report
City of Madera
April 2026

Table of Contents
OVERVIEW.........................................................................................................................................6 OUTREACH SUMMARY REPORT OUTLINE.............................................................................................7 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................................7 BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................................8 GOALS AND OBJECTIVES...................................................................................................................................8 OUTREACH APPROACH AND METHODS................................................................................................................8 Multilingual and Equity-Focused Strategies .....................................................................................8 ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITIES..................................................................................................................................9 Promotion of Outreach..................................................................................................................9 STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT...........................................................................................................................10 Feedback Received ....................................................................................................................11 PHASE ONE COMMUNITY OUTREACH ...............................................................................................12 POP-UP EVENTS ...........................................................................................................................................12 COMMUNITY VERBAL COMMENTARY/FEEDBACK RECEIVED ....................................................................................12 MADERA METRO AND DIAL-A-RIDE SURVEY........................................................................................................13 Survey Results ...........................................................................................................................13 COMMUNITY SURVEY — OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS .............................................................................................17 COLLEGE STUDENT SURVEY ............................................................................................................................17 COLLEGE STUDENT SURVEY OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS ........................................................................................20 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENT SURVEY .....................................................................................................................21

1.1 HIGH SCHOOL SURVEY — OPEN-ENDED COMMENTS ..............................................................................24 Cross-Survey Takeaways.............................................................................................................24 COMMUNITY OUTREACH PHASE TWO ...............................................................................................26 COLLATERAL MATERIAL DEVELOPED..................................................................................................................26 Pop-Up Events ...........................................................................................................................26 Open Houses and Listening Session (Hybrid).................................................................................27 MADERA COMMUNITY COLLEGE LISTENING SESSION............................................................................................27 MADERA CITY HALL WORKSHOP FEEDBACK .......................................................................................................27 Transit Accessibility & Technology ................................................................................................27 Dial-A-Ride Usage ......................................................................................................................27 MCCLISTENING SESSION FEEDBACK................................................................................................................28 Transit Accessibility & Technology ................................................................................................28 Student Transportation Challenges...............................................................................................28 Opportunities & Partnerships.......................................................................................................28 Dial-A-Ride Usage (Virtual question) .............................................................................................28 CITY OF MADERA MICROTRANSIT FEASIBILITY STUDY PHASE TWO............................................................................28 RESULTS SUMMARY .......................................................................................................................................38 Awareness and Interest in Microtransit..........................................................................................38 Frequency of Use and Acceptable Wait Times................................................................................38 Acceptable Travel Times and Fare Expectations .............................................................................39 Preferred Service Hours and Days ................................................................................................39 Relationship with Fixed Bus Routes ..............................................................................................39 Interest in Expanded Services ......................................................................................................39 Information Sources and Preferences ...........................................................................................39 CONCLUSIONS ................................................................................................................................39 Overview
The Madera Metro Microtransit Feasibility Study Engagement Plan was a comprehensive strategy designed to involve residents, stakeholders, and transit users in shaping the future of public transportation in Madera, California. Developed in August 2025, the plan outlined a multifaceted, multilingual approach to community engagement that included surveys, open houses, pop-up events, digital outreach, and partnerships with community organizations. The goal was to assess the feasibility of implementing a microtransit system that addressed service gaps, optimized costeffectiveness, and improved user satisfaction while ensuring that the diverse needs and perspectives of Madera's approximately 110,000 annual transit riders were integrated into the final study recommendations. Through strategic messaging, inclusive outreach tactics, and a timeline that extended from August 2025 through March 2026, the engagement plan sought to build awareness, gather meaningful feedback, and foster collaborative decision-making in developing an adaptable and responsive transit system for the community.

Outreach Summary Report Outline
Executive Summary
● Purpose of the outreach effort
● Key findings and themes
● Summary of participation metrics
Background
The City of Madera conducted a study of the current Madera Metro and Dial-A-Ride services to identify areas for improvement, evaluate cost-effectiveness, and ensure transit options met the needs of the community. Madera Metro operated up to 18 twenty-passenger buses, offering four fixed routes on a set schedule and an on-demand option called Dial-A-Ride (DAR). The DAR program had five buses available during the week and one on weekends, with ADA Paratransit service providing curb-to-curb transportation through three vans during the week and one on weekends. Combined, these services supported about 110,000 riders each year.

Madera Metro, in collaboration with Flexlynqs, Ontra Mobility, and Bodewell Group to conduct a microtransit feasibility study aimed at delivering a more convenient, reliable, and rider-centered transit experience for the community. The study also assessed the feasibility of introducing a microtransit service, aiming to address service gaps, improve cost-effectiveness, and boost rider satisfaction, ultimately creating a more flexible and responsive transit system for the community.

The City invited residents to participate in public events and complete surveys to share their thoughts and ideas, as input was essential to evaluating Madera Metro and Dial-A-Ride services to improve cost-effectiveness and meet the community's evolving needs.

Goals and Objectives
● Conducted comprehensive surveys to gather input from the public and key stakeholders, allowing them to express their preferences regarding different types of transit/mobility and to explain the reasons behind their preferences.
● Built awareness and educated the public about the development process and advantages of the Microtransit Feasibility Study.
● Integrated relevant community feedback into the development process of the final Microtransit Feasibility Study.

Outreach Approach and Methods
Multilingual and Equity-Focused Strategies
The engagement plan focused on equity and inclusivity to ensure that Madera residents, especially those from underserved and traditionally underrepresented communities, had meaningful opportunities to participate. To gather input, the City hosted a workshop and an information session, set up pop-up booths, distributed surveys, and provided outreach in multiple languages and accessible formats. This approach ensured that residents could contribute to the future of Madera's transit system.

All outreach materials, including flyers,
social media posts, surveys, and digital
content, were produced in both English
and Spanish to reflect the linguistic
diversity of the community. The project
website and virtual engagement hub
also offered bilingual access, and
interpretation services were made
available at public events. The study's
online presence, including surveys for
both outreach phases, was offered in
both English and Spanish to maximize
accessibility.

Equity was woven throughout the
engagement approach, with particular
attention paid to reaching low-income
communities, seniors, individuals with
disabilities, youth, and other groups
that might have faced barriers to participation. By offering a hybrid (in-person and virtual) meeting format and conducting outreach at community gathering places, the team worked to reduce obstacles and ensure diverse voices shaped the study's recommendations.

Engagement Activities
Promotion of Outreach
The surveys and outreach events were promoted through multiple e-blasts to community partners, social media posts on City of Madera and Madera Metro Meta pages, and flyers posted on transit buses. The interactive pop-up booth events were conducted in venues where people were ready to gather, such as the Madera Flea Market, El Toro Loco Market, the Frank A. Bergon Senior Center, and the Pan American Community Center.

Social media posts were designed to encourage the general public to complete the survey. Posts and visuals targeting the City of Madera region were developed in multiple languages to promote equity. Bilingual e-blast content was developed to share event information and project details with a broad range of stakeholders across the City of Madera. Targeted local businesses in high-traffic areas on the east side of the City of Madera.

To support project messaging and draw
attention to the effort, the team prepared
a suite of collateral materials. The team
focused on ensuring these were written in
an easy-to-understand way with minimal
technical text, so the public was able to
authentically engage and provide input.

Collateral materials included, but were
not limited to flyers, surveys, and
displays. All materials were developed in
English and Spanish. A press release
was sent to the Madera Tribune and Big
Valley News to inform the public about
the hybrid workshop held on March 3,
2026.

The Madera Community College
informational session was scheduled for
Thursday, February 19, 2026, at 11:00
AM in hybrid format (in-person + virtual) in the Multipurpose Room. The College distributed flyers, posted on campus TV screens, and leveraged student groups for outreach.

To maximize the reach of outreach efforts and increase accessibility, the team prepared an interactive, multilingual virtual engagement hub on Social Pinpoint or a similar platform. The team brought the City's feasibility study—including information on each proposed option and feedback opportunities—to life in a visually digestible and impactful way. Site features included project overview, announcements, surveys, and outreach opportunities. This website drove public participation to bring in ample feedback to be considered in the final assessment of the study.

Stakeholder Engagement
In-person meetings with City Council members were held in September to gather information on current systems and community needs.

Table 1. Stakeholder Engagement Schedule

CITY OFFICIALS DATE
Mayor Cece Gallegos 9/22/25
Council member Anita Evans 9/22/25
City Manager Arnoldo Rodriguez 9/22/25

CITY OFFICIALS DATE
Councilmember Rohi Zacharia 9/22/25
Councilmember Jose Rodriguez 9/23/25
Feedback Received
• Dial-A-Ride Services
o Dial-A-Ride works well, but availability is limited.
o There is a need to expand service hours.
o The senior community is a primary user of Dial-A-Ride services. o More services are needed overall.
• Safety & Rider Experience
o Driver schedules are tight, and drivers tend to drive fast. o Do riders feel safe and secure on the transit?
o The drop-off and pick-up location at the hospital is a busy and frequently used stop. o Riders should be given a grace period to catch the bus. • Infrastructure & Accessibility
o Some transit stops need better shelters and seating.
o Ensure all amenities are ADA compliant.
o Are stops located in the right places?
• Service Coverage & Frequency
o More frequent services are needed for the east side of town. o A fixed route is preferred.
o Better accuracy of bus arrival times is needed.
• Awareness & Outreach
o It is difficult to get people to understand that the service is free. o The food bank is a potential source for distributing information. o Connect with the school district to distribute information. o A swap meet is a good location for gathering feedback. • Ridership Observations & Questions
o Parents sometimes use taxis to send high school students to school. o How do college students use the transit services?
o Empty buses are noticed driving by.
o Is there a social stigma that needs to be addressed when it comes to riding the bus?
Phase One Community Outreach
Pop-Up Events
The pop-up events successfully attracted a diverse array of participants, offering them the opportunity to actively engage with the project team. Attendees varied from community
members who wanted to learn more about the initiative to individuals who took the time to complete the survey. These events provided a venue for interaction, allowing participants to ask questions, share feedback, and contribute valuable insights that would shape the project's future.

Table 2. Schedule of Pop-Up Events
LOCATION DATE TIME # PARTICIPANTS
Pan American Community Center October 22, 2025 11 am – 12 pm 14 Frank A. Bergon Senior Center October 23, 2025 11 am – 12 pm 13 Madera Flea Market October 26, 2025 8 – 10 am 27
El Toro Loco Market December 4, 2025 3 pm – 4 pm 6
Community Verbal Commentary/Feedback Received
• I live far from the main road/bus route.
• I have my own vehicle.
• Mother stated that because she was late to pick daughter from school the daughter took the bus and was given drugs and was hospitalized. (Since she didn't have an alternative way to get home the mother believes it left her vulnerable and allowed more time for her to get into trouble.)
• Thank you for improving transportation.
• Please provide a ramp for 3 wheelers in case. More bus stops need to have shelters or areas for warm weather, while we are waiting.
• The bus driver left a person running.
• Dial-a-ride is helpful when you live far. Three dollars is a lot to make it a dollar ride. • There are more frequent bus stops so I wouldn't have to wait so long for a bus. • More physical maps.
• The bus didn't arrive on time, and I had to pay $20 for a taxi to send my daughter to HS and that was very expensive for me.
• The bus driver was not Hispanic, and I needed to ask questions, and they couldn't help me. Bus routes changed and I don't know which bus to take. The bus also doesn't take direct routes to the areas I need to go to.
• Sometimes when I am waiting at a bus stop, the buses just drive by without stopping. I'm not sure if they were supposed to stop for me or not.

Madera Metro and Dial-A-Ride Survey
Surveys were distributed through eblast to stakeholder contact lists, posted on the project website with links to the City of Madera website, linked to printed material through QR codes. The City of Madera conducted a Microtransit Feasibility Study in 2025, collecting 66 surveys from various community locations to understand transportation usage, perceptions of the Madera Metro bus service, and desired transit improvements. The study gathered insights from English and Spanish speakers, as well as a college student survey, highlighting key challenges and preferences regarding public transit in Madera.

Survey Results
In a typical week, which types of transportation do you or members of your household use?

EVALUATION RESULT
Most common
response
Personal vehicle, used far more than any other transportation type across all trip purposes.

What do you think of the Madera Metro transit service?

EVALUATION RESULT
Overall
sentiment
Respondents most frequently selected "Unsure" when evaluating Madera Metro service. For several items, such as travel times, feeling safe, and overall satisfaction, "Unsure" appears as the dominant category. Other positive responses like "Almost always" and "Often" are also common, but generally less frequent than "Unsure." Most bus users say that they feel safe and view the service as convenient.

If you do NOT use the Madera Metro bus service, why not? (Check all that apply)
EVALUATION %
Infrequent service 40.68%
Doesn't go close enough to where I travel 43.18%
It takes too long to travel by bus 21.37%
Buses are too crowded 7.05%
I don't know what bus to take 37.96%
Bus routes aren't direct enough 23.87%
Doesn't operate the hours/days I need to travel 12.05%
Would not feel safe and secure on public transit 2.50%
Would not take transit under any circumstances 2.28%
Other 14.32%
Transit/mobility improvements I would like to see (Top 3) EVALUATION %
Better information on how to use Madera Metro 66.77%
Expanded weekend service 40.37%
Later weeknight service 33.85%
Earlier weekday morning service 6.52%
On-demand microtransit / ride hailing service 8.30%
More bus stops 38.43%
More frequent bus service 10.87%
More shelters or benches at bus stops 25.55%
More direct service 25.78%
Fewer transfers required 3.96%
Mobile phone app for real-time information 22.36%
Wi-Fi/wireless Internet on the bus 11.50%
Better bus service to specific locations 1.79%
Other 3.96%
How many people live in your household?
HOUSEHOLD SIZE %
0 members 5.00%
1 member 55.22%
2 members 18.00%
3 members 2.00%
4 members 2.00%
5 members 2.00%
More 0.00%
How many cars or SUVs?
VEHICLES %
0 vehicles 5.00%
1 vehicle 60.00%
2 vehicles 35.00%
Community Survey — Open-Ended Comments
• It's difficult to move around town for groceries and doctor appointments when the car is not working.
• I would like free services or rides for elderly or the community to and from appointments and a phone number to call and they can pick them up at their door. • My mom takes the bus to her doctor's appointments because she doesn't drive… She often tells me how unreliable the bus is—sometimes she has to walk across town. • I think that all of the transit agencies in Madera County should consolidate into one system, like Merced County has. It doesn't really make sense to have three different operators in a county as small as ours. A consolidated transit system offers significant benefits including operational and cost efficiency, better regional and long-term planning, and a seamless experience for riders.
• The bus doesn't come on time. My daughter's school starts at 8:30am and there have been times she's taken the bus and has been late to school. There have been times we have to call a taxi, and it is too expensive.
• The only thing is we need shelter out of the rain and cold while we are waiting! • More information should be out there for the public. I am unsure where to access that information.

College Student Survey
• Are you a full-time or part-time student?
o 7 out of 11 are full-time students.
• Do you have a driver's license?
o 4 out of 11 hold a driver's license.
• If yes, do you have a vehicle available daily?
o 7 out of 11 do not have a vehicle available. 1 out of 11 has a vehicle and 3 did not respond.
• What days of the week do you typically have classes?
o 8 out of 11 have classes on Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday. 7 out of 11 have classes on Thursday and 2 our of 11 have classes on Friday. • What hours of the day do you typically have classes?
o Students have classes across all hours of the day, from early morning through late evening. An all-day service window with special attention to the 8 a.m. - 12 p.m. peak. • How do you currently travel to and from college?
o 9 out of 11 are drop off / pick up by parent, guardian, or other family member o 3 out of 11 drive alone or with passengers
o 1 out of 11 ride with friend(s)
o 4 out of 11 ride a Madera Metro or Dial-A-Ride transit bus - Purple Line / Route 1 o 2 out of 11 ride a Madera Metro or Dial-A-Ride transit bus - Green Line / Route 3 o 1 out of 11 ride Madera County Connection (MCC)
o 2 out of 11 take a taxi, Uber/Lyft, or similar transportation service • Where do you usually go when you leave college after your last class? o Among those responding, homeward travel dominates with 10 responses, with 3 staying at the college for after class activities, 1 goes to another location and two people responded with other indicating work, errands, and appointments. • When do you normally leave college property after class? o 3 leave within 15 minutes after last class, 5 stay up to one hour after last class, with 1 staying one to two hours after last class and 2 staying two hours or more after last class.

Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following statements.

STATEMENT AGREE NOT SURE DISAGREE
I feel safe riding Madera Metro 72.7% 18.2% 9.1%
Prefer fixed route & schedule 72.7% 27.3% 0.0%
Prefer on-demand (app/call) 90.9% 9.1% 0.0%
Bus = hang out with friends 27.3% 54.5% 9.1%
Bus gives greater independence 81.8% 18.2% 0.0%
Parent/guardian would NOT want me to ride 9.1% 18.2% 72.7% What do you think of the Madera Metro transit service?

ATTRIBUTE ALMOST

ALWAYS OFTEN UNSURE
NOT
VERY
OFTEN
ALMOST
NEVER
Service is convenient & easy to use 33.3% 44.4% 11.1% 0.0% 11.1% Travel times are reasonable 11.1% 55.6% 11.1% 11.1% 11.1% I feel safe on Madera Metro 44.4% 33.3% 11.1% 0.0% 11.1% Info is readily available 44.4% 22.2% 22.2% 0.0% 11.1%
Madera Metro is punctual 0.0% 44.4% 44.4% 11.1% 0.0%
Transfers are convenient 33.3% 33.3% 22.2% 0.0% 11.1%

ATTRIBUTE ALMOST

ALWAYS OFTEN UNSURE
NOT
VERY
OFTEN
ALMOST
NEVER
Overall satisfaction 33.3% 33.3% 22.2% 0.0% 11.1%
If you do NOT use the Madera Metro bus service, why not?

ATTRIBUTE RESPONSES
Infrequent service 36.4%
It doesn’t go close enough to where I travel to and from 27.3% It takes too long to travel by bus 18.2%
Buses are too crowded 9.1%
I don’t know what bus to take 0.0%
Bus routes aren’t direct enough 27.3%
Madera Metro doesn’t operate the hours of the day or the days of week that I would want to travel 9.1%
I would not feel safe and secure on public transit or waiting for transit would not feel safe and secure on public transit or waiting for transit 0.0% I would not take transit under any circumstances 0.0%
Which improvements would encourage you to ride the Metro bus system?

ATTRIBUTE RESPONSES
Better information on how to use Madera Metro Bus Service 45.5% A mobile phone app for real-time information 63.6%
Wi-Fi/wireless Internet access on the bus 27.3%
Weekend service 36.4%
Later weeknight service 45.5%
Earlier weekday morning service 36.4%
On-demand service like a taxi, Uber/Lyft, or similar transportation service (concept of subsidized, shared-ride sedan or van service requested through a Smart phone, tablet app, or telephone)

36.4%
More bus stops 54.5%
More frequent bus service 45.5%
More shelters or benches at bus stops 36.4%
More direct service / fewer transfers required 54.5%
College Student Survey Open-Ended Comments
● Being able to take a bus to MCC would be very impactful for me and others in the future, however they do not make stops outside Madera. If the bus were to take passengers in Fresno, it would make it easier for students to go to in person classes. ● I feel safe riding the metro bus but I wish it would come on time… sometimes it comes 30 [minutes] to 1 hour late. Which sometimes I'm late to class because the Metro bus is my only ride to school.
● I have to drive four hours every school day to get to college, and the bus stops by my house, however, it doesn't stop at my school.

High School Student Survey
• Which school do you attend?
o 2 out of 4 selected “Madera South High School”. 2 out of 4 selected “Madera High School”.
• What grade are you in?
o 1 - 9
th
o 1- 10th
o 2 11th.
• Do you have a driver’s license?
o 2 out of 4 responded indicated they did have a driver’s license. • If yes, do you have a vehicle available daily?
o 2 out of 4 selected “No”.
o 2 out of 4 selected “No response”.
• How do you currently travel to and from school?
o Respondents chose the options to “Walk, be Dropped off or picked up by a parent, guardian, or other family member, or Ride with friends”. • Where do you usually go when you leave school in the afternoon? o Respondents selected the “Go directly home, Stay at school for after-school activities, or Go to another location for after-school activities” options. • When do you normally leave school property after dismissal bell? o All respondents stated they leave within 15 minutes after the bell.

Please indicate if you agree or disagree with the following statements.

STATEMENT AGREE DISAGREE NO

RESPONSE
I feel safe riding the Madera Metro transit bus 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% I would prefer a fixed route/schedule with posted stops 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% I would prefer a flexibly scheduled on-demand bus 50.0% 25.0% 25.0% Riding the bus would let me hang out with friends 0.0% 25.0% 75.0% Using the bus would give me greater independence 75.0% 0.0% 25.0% My parent/guardian would not want me to ride the bus 25.0% 75.0% 0.0% If you now use Madera Metro bus service or have used it in the past, what do you think of the transit service?

STATEMENT ALMOST

ALWAYS OFTEN UNSURE
NOT
VERY
OFTEN
ALMOST

NEVER SKIPPED
Service is
convenient and
easy to use

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
The travel times are
reasonable 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
I feel safe on the
Madera Metro
service

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Madera Metro
information is
readily available

0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Madera Metro
arrives on schedule
(punctual)

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Transfers are
convenient 0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Overall, I am
satisfied with
Madera Metro

0.0% 0.0% 25.0% 0.0% 0.0% 75.0%
Each row totals 100%. Notable that 75% of respondents skipped every question in this section, with only 1 respondent answering each — and most of those answers were "Unsure." If you do NOT use Madera Metro bus service, why not?

OPTIONS PERCENTAGE
Infrequent service 0.0%
Doesn't go close enough to where I travel 25.0%
Takes too long to travel by bus 0.0%
Buses are too crowded 25.0%
I don't know what bus to take 100.0%
Bus routes aren't direct enough 25.0%
Doesn't operate the hours/days I want 25.0%
Would not feel safe/secure 0.0%
Would be embarrassed to use transit 0.0%
Would not take transit under any circumstances 0.0%
Other (write-in) 0.0%
Which of the following potential improvements would encourage you to ride the Metro bus system?

SELECTIONS PERCENTAGE
Better information on how to use Madera Metro 75.0%
A mobile phone app for real-time information 75.0%
Wi-Fi/wireless Internet on the bus 50.0%
Weekend service 50.0%
Later weeknight service 50.0%
Earlier weekday morning service 50.0%
On-demand service (Uber/Lyft-style) 25.0%
More bus stops 75.0%

SELECTIONS PERCENTAGE
More frequent bus service 25.0%
More shelters or benches at bus stops 25.0%
More direct service / fewer transfers 25.0%
Other (write-in) 0.0%

1.1 High School Survey — Open-Ended Comments
Us school kids need this so much since we can't ride the school bus because it's within a mile of the school.

Cross-Survey Takeaways

THEME SUMMARY
Punctuality A recurring concern across all surveys — buses arriving late impacts school, work, and appointments.

Route Coverage Multiple respondents want service expanded to areas outside madera (e.g., fresno) and more direct routes.

Information
Access
Respondents want better information on how to use the system, including physical maps and a mobile app.

On-Demand
Service
Interest in flexible, on-demand microtransit (uber/lyft-style) is strong, especially among students.

Shelters & Stops Requests for more shelters, benches, and bus stops are common among household respondents.

Consolidation At least one respondent strongly advocated for consolidating madera county's transit agencies into one system.

Safety Most respondents feel safe on the bus, though some parental concerns were noted in the student surveys.

Community Outreach Phase Two
The team ventured back into the
community to actively seek feedback
from residents regarding various ondemand ideas and proposed changes. They engaged with
community members through
discussions and surveys to better
understand their needs and
preferences, ensuring that the
proposed initiatives align with the
desires of the community.

Collateral Material
Developed
• Flyer: A bilingual flyer was created to promote the workshop. The flyer included important information about the workshop, such as its location and scheduled time, along with a brief description of the project.
• E-blasts: A bilingual e-blast was developed to promote the workshop. These e-blasts were sent via email and shared with their respective communities. • Social Media: A social media calendar and content plan were created to promote the workshops.
• Project Website: The project website was updated to feature the workshop, enhancing event promotion, and disseminating information about the project. The website included bilingual project overview information, contact details, and a digital survey.

Pop-Up Events
LOCATION DATE TIME # PARTICIPANTS
Madera Community College February 19, 2026 11 am – 12 pm 7 Pan American Community Center March 4, 2026 11 am – 12 pm 17 Madera Flea Market March 11, 2026 8 – 11 am 23
Walgreens Transit Stop March 16, 2026 8 – 11 am 8
Open Houses and Listening Session (Hybrid)
LOCATION DATE TIME # PARTICIPANTS
Madera City Hall March 3, 2026 5 – 6 p.m. 3 in-person | 3 virtual
Madera Community College
Listening Session
February 19, 2026 11 a.m. – 12
p.m.
7 in-person | 3
virtual
Madera City Hall Workshop Feedback
Transit Accessibility & Technology
• I heard two potential modes for ride requests: phone call or digital (app). Due to the multilingual and different abilities found throughout our community, are there more visual-based and accessible technologies we can lean on when it comes to ride requests?
• Is there a way to get a transit stop at the Casa Grande Motel as residents need to access services in the City of Madera (Hope House and Madera County Department of Behavioral Health Services)?
• Consider providing more ADA compliant options for riders.

Dial-A-Ride Usage
• Would on-demand transit take people through drive-thru restaurants? With people with accessible needs in mind.
• Will each on-demand vehicle have a wheelchair ramp or lift? • Currently Uber and Lyft are not readily available in Madera, so residents have to rely on taxis later in the evenings.
• Would fare prices be impacted by whether this is an electric or gas based fleet? MCC Listening Session Feedback
Transit Accessibility & Technology
• Is there a transit app available for riders?
• Madera Metro is always considered a viable option; however, buses do not always arrive on time despite the schedule.

Student Transportation Challenges
• Students would rather park in the orchards than pay for a parking permit. • One student reported taking an Uber to school every time they have class. • Students cannot stay for evening courses because they do not have transportation. • Evening classes are offered Monday through Thursday.

Opportunities & Partnerships
• There is interest in the ability to move back and forth between Fresno, Madera, and the school via transit.
• The college has grant money available to provide $200 gas cards or Uber cards to students in need but would prefer to work with the City to fund bus rides instead. • There is an option to pilot a program with the college.

Dial-A-Ride Usage (Virtual question)
• A question was raised regarding how many passengers are typically in a Dial-A-Ride vehicle when the service is used.

City of Madera Microtransit Feasibility Study Phase Two The following analysis reflects the 69 responses collected between February 2 and March 20, 2026.

Before today, were you familiar with on-demand microtransit service?

42.00%

58.00%
Yes No

ANSWER RESULTS
Yes 42.0%
No 58.0%
How interested would you be in using an on-demand microtransit service?

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Very Interested 55.1%
Somewhat Interested 20.3%
Neutral 15.9%
Somewhat Uninterested 2.9%
Not Interested 5.8%
How often would you use an on-demand microtransit service? 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Very Interested Somewhat Interested Neutral Somewhat Uninterested Not Interested 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Daily A few times per week A few times per month Rarely Never

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Maximum acceptable wait time for pickup?

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
10 minutes or less 20.3%
15 minutes 26.1%
20 minutes 11.6%
30 minutes 23.2%
More than 30 minutes 11.6%
Responses total 64 out of 69, meaning 5 participants (7.2%) did not answer this question. 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
10 minutes or less 15 minutes 20 minutes 30 minutes More than 30 minutes Daily 27.5%
A few times per week 21.7%
A few times per month 33.3%
Rarely 8.7%
Never 8.7%
What fare would make on-demand microtransit feel like a good value?

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
I wouldn't pay for this 18.8%
$2 per one-way trip 42.0%
$3-4 per one-way trip 15.9%
$5 per one-way trip 11.6%
I'd pay anything less than Uber/Lyft 10.1%
Note: Responses total 68 out of 69, meaning 1 participant (1.4%) did not answer this question.

Would you use microtransit outside current operating hours? (Check all that apply)
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I wouldn't pay for this $2 per one-way trip
$3-4 per one-way trip $5 per one-way trip
I'd pay anything less than Uber/Lyft
55%
51%
61%
58%
Early mornings (before
7am)
At night (after 7pm) On Saturdays On Sundays

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Early mornings (before 7am) 55.1%
At night (after 7pm) 50.7%
On Saturdays 60.9%
On Sundays 58.0%
Comfortable if microtransit were the only transit option?

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Yes 29%
No, I'd still need the 4 fixed bus routes 53.6%
I don't use the bus routes now 17.4%
Features of fixed routes that make you continue riding? (Check all that apply)

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
No booking required 40.6%
No app required 15.9%
More predictable schedule 39.1%
I already know how it works 18.8%
Worried on-demand will take longer 14.5%
Worried on-demand will cost more 18.8%
Other 1.4%
If the 4 fixed bus routes were changed, what matters most? (Pick 2)

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Buses come more often (frequency) 52.2%
Routes go more directly to key destinations 30.4%
Faster trips (fewer stops) 13.0%
Better on-time performance 31.9%
Earlier morning service 11.6%
Later evening service 18.8%
Better weekend service 15.9%
52%
32% 30%
19% 16% 13% 12% 6%
Buses come
more often
(frequency)
Better ontime
performance
Routes go
more directly
to key
destinations
Later
evening
service
Better
weekend
service
Faster trips
(fewer stops)
Earlier
morning
service
Other
Other 5.8%
On-demand service to Fresno for medical appointments?

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Yes 89.9%
No 1.4%
Not sure 8.7%
How are you receiving info about Madera transit now? (Check all that apply)
90%
1% 9%
Yes / Sí No Not sure / No estoy seguro

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Madera Metro website 24.6%
Madera Metro app 7.2%
Word of mouth 43.5%
Social media 11.6%
Posted flyers and signs 11.6%
Community events 11.6%
43%
25%
12% 12% 12% 7%
How would you like to receive info in the future? (Check all that apply)

ANSWER PERCENTAGE
Madera Metro website 30.4%
Madera Metro app 33.3%
Word of mouth 24.6%
Social media 55.1%
Posted flyers and signs 44.9%
Community events 34.8%
Other 1.4%
55%
45%
35% 33% 30% 25%
1%
Results Summary
Awareness and Interest in Microtransit
A majority of respondents (58%) were not familiar with ondemand microtransit before taking this survey. This signals a significant education gap and points to the need for a robust public awareness campaign before any microtransit service launch. Despite low prior awareness, 75.4% of respondents expressed positive interest (Very + Somewhat Interested). Only

8.7% were uninterested.

Frequency of Use and Acceptable Wait Times
The largest group (33.3%) anticipate using the service a few times per month, while nearly half (49.2%) indicate weekly or daily use. Combined, 82.5% of respondents anticipate using microtransit at least a few times per month, demonstrating a solid base of potential ridership.

Expectations cluster between 10–30 minutes, with the 15-minute mark being the single most selected option. Notably, 46.4% of respondents expect a wait of 15 minutes or less, while 34.8% are willing to wait 20–30 minutes.

Acceptable Travel Times and Fare Expectations
The $2 price point dominates as the most broadly acceptable fare. Importantly, 18.8% wouldn't pay at all, suggesting a segment of the ridership that depends on free or subsidized transit. On the other end, 21.7% would pay $5 or more (or simply less than rideshare).

Preferred Service Hours and Days
All four extended-hours options received strong support (50%+), with weekend service leading slightly.

Relationship with Fixed Bus Routes
Over half of respondents would not be comfortable losing fixed routes in favor of microtransit alone. Microtransit should be positioned as a complementary service, not a replacement. The top retention factors for fixed routes are convenience of no booking and schedule predictability, both near 40%. When asked what matters most if fixed routes were modified, increased frequency is the top priority by a wide margin. Combined with the demand for better on-time performance and more direct routing, riders are telling the City they value reliable, efficient, and frequent service above all else. Extended hours (evening and weekend) are important but secondary.

Interest in Expanded Services
A large majority (90%) expressed interest in a microtransit or shared on-demand service to Fresno for medical appointments, with 9% unsure and 1% opposed, indicating very strong demand for regional connectivity.

Information Sources and Preferences
Currently, word of mouth (43%) dominates, but riders want to receive future information primarily through social media (55%), flyers/signs (45%), community events (35%), and the Madera Metro app (33%).

For future communication preferences, social media was the top choice (55%), followed by posted flyers and printed materials (45%), community events (34%), Madera Metro app / mobile apps (33%), the Madera Metro website (30%), and word of mouth (24%).

Conclusions
The engagement process successfully gathered diverse community input highlighting transit service gaps, rider concerns, and strong interest in microtransit solutions. The feedback informed study recommendations and identified challenges and effective engagement strategies for future efforts.

May 2026
1 Final Report
Madera Metro Microtransit Feasibility Study
Purpose of Discussion
2 • Share key findings from community outreach
• Review outcomes of the Study
• Present recommended transit service improvements
Key Insight
A single solution will not meet all needs.
 Recommended approach: Hybrid System = Modified Fixed Routes + On-Demand 3 Today is about improving service for residents - faster, more flexible, and more reliable—without increasing cost
Why This Matters Now
• Rising expectations for faster, more flexible transportation • Current system not meeting community needs efficiently • Opportunity to improve service without increasing overall budget
 This is about delivering better service with the same dollars
Current System Challenges
• Long wait times (up to 60 minutes)
• Underused routes consuming resources
• Limited-service hours
• Indirect routes → longer travel times
 Result: Residents are underserved despite existing
investment
Recommended Approach
A Balanced, Practical Solution - Hybrid System:
• Maintain essential fixed routes
• Expand flexible on-demand service (microtransit)
 Combines familiar service + modern mobility
What We Heard
• Residents want faster, more reliable service
• Need to maintain simple, predictable options with
better information about those options
• Strong interest in on-demand transportation
Current Demand
4 <20
20-120
120-200
200-600
>600
Trips/Month
Proposed Madera Fixed-Route and On-Demand Services
5 Proposed Fresno Connector Service
6 Fixed-Route Service Comparison
7 Metric Baseline Scenario Proposed Scenario Change
Route 1 (Purple Line / Cleveland
Ave)
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $726,390/yr
Ridership: 30,000–34,600
Hours: 7-6:30pm Weekdays, 9-
4pm Saturdays
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $828,576/yr
Ridership: 32,900–42,700
Unchanged services span
✓ More direct routing
✓ More reliable headways
✓ Focus on highest-demand
corridor
✓ +2,900–8,100 riders
Route 2 (Orange Line / Yosemite
Ave)
Headway: 60 min
Cost: $726,390/yr
Ridership: 22,100–24,400
Hours: 7-6:30pm Weekdays, 9-
4pm Saturdays
Headway: 30 min
Cost: $828,576/yr
Ridership: 19,700–26,300
Unchanged service span
✓ 2x frequency improvement
✓ More direct routing
✓ Improved travel time reliability
Route 3 (Green Line)
Headway: 60 min Cost:
$647,010/yr Ridership: 10,300–
13,400
Now served by on-demand
microtransit
✓ Riders served at comparable or
even faster travel times
✓ ~$647K redirected to higherdemand corridors
Route 4 (Blue Line)
Headway: 60 min Cost:
$238,140/yr Ridership: 2,300–
3,800
Now served by on-demand
microtransit
✓ Riders served at comparable or
even faster travel times
✓ ~$238K redirected to core
service with higher demand
On-Demand Service Comparison
8 Service Aspect Baseline (Dial-ARide)
Proposed
(Microtransit) Change
Vehicle & Booking Traditional vehicles
Phone-based booking
Modern fleet, emphasis
on app-first booking
(phone still available)
✓ Real-time tracking
✓ Improved customer experience
✓ Stronger system branding
Operating Hours
Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm
Saturday: 9am–4pm
Sunday: 8:30am–2:30pm
Weekdays: same
Saturday: 9am–6:30pm
(+2.5 hrs)
Sunday: same hours
✓ Expanded weekend service hours
✓ Better alignment with community travel needs
Annual Operating Cost $1,757,340 $2,327,940
+$570,600 (expanded service, improved fleet)
(Note: Costs may decrease through competitive
procurement; we assumed current cost per hour which is
high relative to industry benchmarks)
Projected Annual
Ridership 21,500–32,200 32,300–47,900 +10,800–15,700 riders New Supplemental On-Demand Services
9 Service Description & Model Operating Hours Cost & Ridership Shoulder Hour TNC
(Madera)
-City-subsidized shared-ride
TNC trips (Uber/Lyft) to fill
early morning and evening
gaps
-Pay-per-trip model
Weekdays: 6–7am, 6:30–
8pm
Saturday: 6:30–8pm
Cost: ~$3,750/yr
Riders: 250–1,300
Fresno Connector
-On-demand service
connecting Madera to Fresno
-Can transition to scheduled
shuttle if demand grows, with
minimal cost increase while
maintaining coverage
-Evaluates long-term regional
connectivity demand
Weekdays: 7am–6:30pm Cost: ~$34,500/yr Riders:
1,200–3,500
Summary
10 Metric Baseline Scenario Proposed Scenario Change
Estimated Annual
Ridership 86,100 – 108,300 86,300 – 121,600 +300 to +13,300 riders Total Annual Operating
Cost ~$4,095,270 ~$4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%)
Cost Per Trip $38 $33 -$5 per trip (↓ 13%)
Number of Fixed Routes 4 routes 2 routes Strategic consolidation to core corridors
On-Demand Service
Type Traditional Dial-A-Ride On-demand microtransit
Modernized service
delivery and customer
experience, expanded
hours
Supplemental OnDemand Services None
Subsidized shared-ride
Uber/Lyft trips during
shoulder hours and to
Fresno
Expanded hours;
improved access to
Fresno medical
appointments and college
classes
Summary of Operating Cost
11 Service Baseline Cost Proposed Cost Difference
Dial-A-Ride / Microtransit $1,757,340 $2,327,940 +$570,600 Route 1 (Purple) $726,390 $828,576 +$102,186
Route 2 (Orange) $726,390 $828,576 +$96,516
Route 3 (Green) $647,010 $0 -$647,010
Route 4 (Blue) $238,140 $0 -$238,140
Shoulder Hour TNC $0 $3,750 +$3,750
Fresno Connector $0 $34,500 +$34,500
TOTAL SYSTEM $4,095,270 $4,023,342 -$71,928 (↓ 1.8%)
12 Today is about improving service for residents - faster, more flexible, and more reliable—without increasing cost What Stays the Same (Stability)
• Continued fixed-route service on key corridors
• Service to critical destinations:
o Hospital & medical services
o Shopping hubs (Walgreens area)
o Social services
• ADA accessibility remains a priority
 No one is left without service
Expanded Access Options
New pilots (low-risk, high-value):
• Early morning / evening service (Uber/Lyft partnerships) • Fresno connection pilot
 Test new services before scaling → responsible use of funds
Financial Responsibility
Uses existing budget more efficiently
• Potential to reduce cost per trip
• Pay-for-use model for some services
 Better outcomes without higher costs
What Improves (Service Upgrade)
• Shorter fixed route wait times (20–35 minutes vs. 60+) • More direct trips (fewer circling routes)
• Expanded service hours
• Citywide coverage through microtransit
 Faster, more convenient service for residents
What This Means for Madera Residents
• More transportation choices
• Faster trips
• Better access to jobs, education, healthcare, and services • Improved quality of life and mobility
Implementation Plan
13 Phase 2: Fixed-Route
Refinement and Public
Communication

1. Fixed-route stop spacing
analysis

2. Evaluate stop
infrastructure and stop
changes

3. Update timetables

4. Fare policy analysis

5. Prepare communication
materials

6. Outreach and marketing
Phase 1: Transition to OnDemand Microtransit Pilot
(6-9 months)

1. Develop competitive RFP

2. Release RFP & begin
procurement

3. Vendor selection &
contract award

4. Microtransit system
configuration & setup

5. Launch microtransit
service
Phase 3: Fixed-Route
Service Implementation

1. Launch new timetables for
Rt. 1&2

2. Remove remaining routes

3. Monitoring against KPIs,
refinement as needed
Risk Overview and Path Forward
14 Risks & Mitigation
Risk: Public concern about route changes
Mitigation: Phased rollout + strong communication
Risk: Technology barriers
Mitigation: Phone booking option
Risk: Accessibility concerns
Mitigation: ADA-compliant vehicles and fixed routes
Decision Point
We are seeking direction from council to:
• Approve the recommended approach
• Direct staff to begin work toward implementation

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Approved by: Council Meeting of: August 5, 2026
_________________________________ Agenda Number: _____________ Michael Lima, Director of Financial Services
_________________________________
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Information report on the Madera Metro Transit System
RECOMMENDATION:

This report is submitted for informational purposes and there is no action requested from the City Council (Council)
SUMMARY:

This report provides an overview of the City’s transit system performance for the 4th quarter of Fiscal Year 2025/26, covering the months of April, May and June 2026. Additionally, staff will be providing Year-vs.-Year comparisons between Fiscal Year 2024/25 and Fiscal Year 2025/26 results.

DISCUSSION:

Staff continuously monitors various aspects of its transportation services through monthly reporting by its transit operator, MV Transportation Inc. Among the data monitored are:

1. Ridership

2. On-Time Performance

3. Vehicle Performance

4. Driver Performance

5. Community Feedback

6. Expenditures
Staff will provide a presentation that includes an overview of the aforementioned topics.

E-1
Return to Agenda
FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The Madera Metro public transit service receives Federal funding from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). State funding is also received from the Low Carbon Transit Operations (LCTOP) and the Transportation Development Act (TDA). Local funding includes Measure T. The preparation of this report does not have a direct financial impact other than the staff time dedicated to completing it.

ALTERNATIVES:

This item is for informational purposes only. There is no action being requested from Council on this item.

ATTACHMENTS:

None.

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Council Meeting of: August 5, 2026
Agenda Number:

SUBJECT:

Community Development Block Grant Program 2026/27 Program Year Application Timeline and Public Outreach Efforts
RECOMMENDATION:

Review the CDBG 2026/27 Program Year Application Timeline and provide feedback and direction, if any, to staff.

SUMMARY:

At its July 1, 2026 meeting, staff shared the CDBG application notification process for Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) awards and how that process could be enhanced or expanded.

The City currently notifies potential stakeholders at the beginning of the annual award process through a variety of means; including via email, posted in the Madera Tribune, posted on the City’s website/social media, and shared with Council and the Block Grant Commission (BGC).

Based on Council feedback, staff has updated the Program Year 2026/27 process to include workshops for potential applicants.

DISCUSSION:

The City is an entitlement grantee under the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). HUD requires entitlement grantees to adopt a comprehensive, long-term plan known as the Five-Year Consolidated Plan (Con Plan). HUD annually allocates CDBG and HOME funding to participating jurisdictions. Each year, the City is eligible to apply for and receive the funds through the development and submittal of an Annual Action Plan, which addresses the needs identified in the current five-year Con Plan.

Approved by:

Michael Lima, Director of Financial Services
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
E-2
Return to Agenda
While the statutory deadline to submit an Annual Action Plan to HUD is August 16th, the City’s past practice is to complete the Annual Action Plan by May 16th each year. The CDBG application process is based on this submission deadline.

During the Council meeting on July 1, 2026, Councilmembers expressed a desire to expand the City’s outreach efforts to cast a broad net. Table 1 provides a summary of the upcoming, inclusive of proposed changes, to the CDBG application process.

Table 1: Proposed CDBG Application Process
Date Item
November 2, 2026 Annual CDBG application period opens. Notification is provided to stakeholders via:
 Email using existing City-generated list of stakeholders  Posted in the Madera Tribune
 Posted on the City’s website/social media
 Shared with Council and the BGC
 Invitation to apply letters to local non-profits
November 2026 During the week of November 16, 2026, hold a workshop for interested applicants. Location to be determined.

January 2027 During the week of January 11, 2027, hold a workshop for interested applicants. Location to be determined.

January 29, 2027 2027/28 CDBG application period closes.

February 2027 Staff review of applications.

March 16, 2027(a) Special Meeting of the BGC to review FY 2027/28 applications and establish proposed funding recommendations for Council consideration.

March 19, 2027(a) 30-day public review period begins.

April 21, 2027 CDBG draft Annual Action Plan presented to City Council. Public review period closes.

May 5, 2027 Council consideration of the Final AAP. Upon approval from Council, staff submit the Annual Action Plan to HUD.

May 16, 2027 Due date to submit to the City’s Annual Action Plan to HUD (a) These dates will be reviewed and considered for approval by the BGC during its meeting on Monday, August 3, 2026.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

The Fiscal Year 2026/27 CDBG Administration budget is likely to experience an increase in expenses associated with print materials and other supplies required for hosting the workshops.

However, the impact from those expenses is anticipated to be minimal, and will be accommodated within the CDBG Administration budget’s existing appropriations. There is no anticipated financial impact to the City’s General Fund from the changes proposed to this schedule.

ALTERNATIVES:

This is an informational report only.

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no attachments.

REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL
Keith Helmuth, Department Director
Arnoldo Rodriguez, City Manager
SUBJECT:

Sharing of Cost in Continued Monitoring of the San Joaquin River Restoration Program Subsidence Benchmarks
RECOMMENDATION:

Receive update and provide direction regarding participation in the cost of Continued Monitoring of the San Joaquin River Restoration Program Subsidence Benchmarks SUMMARY:

The City of Madera (City) is one of seven agencies that have established a Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) within the boundaries of Madera Groundwater Subbasin (Subbasin) pursuant to the 2014 Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). The seven GSAs include the following members:
 City of Madera (City)  Gravelly Ford Water District
 County of Madera (County)  Root Creek Water District  Madera Irrigation District (MID)  New Stone Water District (NWSD)  Madera Water District (MWD)
Four GSAs, including the City, County, MID, and MWD, prepared one joint Groundwater Sustainability Plan (GSP) while the remaining GSAs prepared their own GSPs.

While the Subbasin GSAs are responsible for attaining their own groundwater sustainability within the Subbasin, the Subbasin itself is also affected in some ways by what occurs in Approved by:

Groundwater Sustainability Agency
Council Meeting of: August 5, 2026
Agenda Number: _________ _
E-3
Return to Agenda
neighboring subbasins. Likewise, the Subbasin has its own effects on other subbasins. One of the areas in which there is some overlap is the reliance upon data previously collected by and provided by the Department of Water Resources (DWR). That overlap and shared reliance extends to the following subbasins:
 Delta- Mendota  Westside
 Merced  Madera
 Kings  Chowchilla
As a result of a decision by DWR to cease collecting subsidence data, the responsibility for collection either shifts to the affected subbasins and their respective GSAs or the subbasins will effectively be forced to use a separate dataset known as the InSAR dataset (InSAR).

DISCUSSION:

In early February of this year, subbasins and their respective GSAs learned that DWR would no longer be collecting subsidence data. This decision was apparently made based on internal needs of the DWR rather than the overall need that included use by GSAs.

Given the alternative of collecting separate data or relying on the InSAR, the affected subbasins have determined that collection of separate accurate data would be preferable. InSAR, the acronym for Interferometric Synthetic Aperture Radar, is a technique for mapping ground deformation using radar images of the Earth's surface that are collected from orbiting satellites.

Staff research indicates that there are various concerns associated with the InSAR that can result in distorted ground deformation measurements and therefore the conclusions expressed in annual and five-year GSP updates. Direct measurement as proposed by the nearby subbasins would thereby reduce or eliminate such concerns.

It is the concerns with the DWR dropping data collection and the limited too costly alternative that caused the group of subbasins outside the Subbasin and the GSAs within the Subbasin to send a letter (attached) to DWR requesting their reconsideration. Around May of this year, DWR indicated they have no interest in assuming monitoring responsibilities and would prefer the subbasins utilize the InSar. As a result, the subbasins sought a proposal to continue data collection through a consultant. That land surveying proposal (attached) provides additional insight into this topic and provides a fixed fee of $127,300.

Table 1 below illustrates the proposed Financial Responsibility by subbasin while Table 2 further defines cost by GSA within the Subbasin.

Table 1: Cost Sharing Proposal by Subbasin
Subbasin Financial Responsibility
Delta-Mendota $21,216.67
Westside $21,216.67
Merced $21,216.67
Madera $21,216.67
Kings $21,216.67
Chowchilla $21,216.67
Total $127,300.00
Table 2: Cost Sharing Proposal by GSA
Within Madera Subbasin
Subbasin Financial
Responsibility
MID $3,030.95
City of Madera $3,030.95
MWD $3,030.95
County of Madera $3,030.95
GFWD $3,030.95
RCWD $3,030.95
NWSD $3,030.95
Total $21,216.67
As of a couple weeks ago, most subbasins/GSAs per our Subbasin Point of Contact had approved of the proposed distribution of costs. Staff is seeking the same concurrence. It is anticipated that a subsequent agreement will be presented to Council in the near future.

FINANCIAL IMPACT:

Costs associated with this GSP related cost are funded through the Water Fund. Specifically, 20303800-6440 is utilized. No impact on the General Fund is anticipated.

ALTERNATIVES:

Alternatives include rejecting participation or proposing a different participation amount.

Consideration of other alternatives would by default shift costs to other partners.

ATTACHMENTS:

1. Request for Department of Water Resources of San Joaquin River Restoration Program Subsidence Benchmarks

2. Land Surveying Proposal
Attachment 1
Request for Department of Water Resources of San Joaquin River Restoration Program Subsidence Benchmarks

Attachment 2
Land Surveying Proposal
455 W Fir Ave, Clovis, CA 93611 • (559) 449-2700
www.provostandpritchard.com
Engineering • Structural • Geostructural • Surveying • Planning • Environmental • GIS • Construction Services • Hydrogeology • Consulting Clovis • Visalia • Bakersfield • Modesto • Los Banos • Chico • Sacramento • Sonora • San Luis Obispo • Riverside • Camarillo • Boise, ID May 4, 2026
John Davids
Davids Engineering on behalf of the Madera Subbasin
346 East F Street, Suite A
Oakdale, CA 95361
Subject: Land Surveying Services for Geodetic Network for Subsidence Monitoring, San Joaquin River Valley, California
Dear Mr. Davids:

Thank you for the opportunity to submit this proposal to provide land surveying services for the subject project.

This proposal discusses our understanding of the project, recommends a scope of services together with associated fees, deliverables and approximate schedules, sets forth our assumptions and discusses other services that may be of interest as the project proceeds.

PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
Due to funding constraints, the U.S. Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation (Reclamation), Mid‑Pacific Region, Surveying and Mapping Branch is no longer providing bi‑annual (twice‑yearly) survey data for the geodetic benchmark network within the San Joaquin River Valley. The original San Joaquin River Restoration Project – Geodetic Network GPS Survey Report, published on May 4, 2012 for the December 2011 survey, identified approximately 61 control points. More recent Bureau of Reclamation documentation, provided as an excel spreadsheet of benchmark coordinate data dated July 2025, indicates that the network has since expanded to approximately 74 control points used for regional subsidence monitoring. No accompanying technical report was available to us with this dataset; the spreadsheet reflects published benchmark positions only.

The discontinuation of this bi‑annual dataset directly affects Groundwater Sustainability Agencies’ (GSAs) ability to comply with the Sustainable Groundwater Management Act (SGMA). SGMA requires GSAs to monitor land subsidence and report subsidence conditions and trends in Annual Reports and five‑year Groundwater Sustainability Plan updates submitted to the California Department of Water Resources (DWR).

Without current, repeatable, high‑accuracy geodetic data, GSAs are limited in their ability to support required subsidence monitoring and reporting.

Provost & Pritchard has been tasked with surveying the existing geodetic benchmark network to generate replacement data formerly provided by Reclamation. Our approach will reference the San Joaquin River Restoration Project – Geodetic Network GPS Survey Report published in 2012 as the primary guideline for survey methodology, network design, and performance criteria, as no subsequent technical reports have been released beyond bi‑annual positional updates to benchmark coordinates. The July 2025 Bureau of Reclamation excel spreadsheet will be used to confirm the current benchmark inventory and identify benchmarks that may have been destroyed or disturbed. The survey will be planned and executed to achieve the original network accuracy goals of ±2 centimeters horizontal accuracy and ±3 centimeters vertical accuracy, consistent with the intent of the geodetic network.

Davids Engineering on behalf of the Madera Subbasin May 4, 2026 Geodetic Network for Subsidence Monitoring Page 2 of 4
Job No.: 26-125
26-125_Subsidence Control Network_Proposal.docx

SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our proposed scope of work for this proposal is described below.

PHASE GEO: (GEODETIC NETWORK)
The work will include reviewing the San Joaquin River Restoration Project – Geodetic Network GPS Survey Report published in 2012, along with the July 2025 Bureau of Reclamation Excel spreadsheet that lists benchmark coordinates. This review will be used to understand how the original network was built and to identify any benchmarks that may have been damaged or removed. The field work will consist only of a static GNSS (GPS) survey, following the same general approach used in the original study. Each benchmark will be surveyed at least twice, with observation times of up to 30 minutes, during periods with good satellite coverage. Coordinates will be based on the same horizontal and vertical reference systems used previously, and all data will be processed using Leica Infinity, with final network adjustments completed using Star*Net.

To improve long‑term consistency and reliability, the survey will also tie into publicly available Continuously Operating Reference Stations (CORS). While six control benchmarks were originally used in 2012, the 2025 spreadsheet shows that only three are currently used as control points. Using CORS adds backup reference points in case any of the existing benchmarks are damaged and helps ensure future surveys can be accurately compared over time. Linking the network to CORS also allows the data to be updated or converted in the future if reference systems or units change, while keeping results consistent. This work will re‑establish a reliable dataset to support subsidence monitoring and SGMA compliance. A map showing the benchmarks and planned CORS locations is attached.

Tasks associated with this phase include:
 Project Management and coordination
 Prepare field plan and delegate field tasks
 Perform field survey of the benchmarks
 Download data and offload supporting documents
 Process baseline data for GNSS network
 Perform network least squares adjustment
 Prepare memo describing survey methodology and results of survey

PROFESSIONAL FEES
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group will perform the services in this Phase for the fixed fee amount of $127,300. Reimbursable Expenses are included in the Fixed Fee amount stated.) (We understand that multiple sub-basins/GSAs will be contributing to this effort, and a cost share amongst the participating agencies is yet to be determined. Once the cost share has been determined, this proposal can be updated and then Provost & Pritchard can invoice the participating agencies directly in accordance with cost share.

Davids Engineering on behalf of the Madera Subbasin May 4, 2026 Geodetic Network for Subsidence Monitoring Page 3 of 4
Job No.: 26-125
26-125_Subsidence Control Network_Proposal.docx

SCHEDULE
Once we receive an executed copy of this Proposal together with the signed Consultant Services Agreement and are authorized to proceed, we will perform the survey within the month of July. The summary report will be provided within six (6) to eight (8) weeks of completion of the survey.

ASSUMPTIONS
 This proposal is based on information provided in the San Joaquin River Restoration Project – Geodetic Network GPS Survey Report dated May 4, 2012, and the July 2025 spreadsheet prepared by the Bureau of Reclamation.
 The project schedule does not include allowances for delays due to weather conditions.  All coordinates are based on NAD83, Zone 4 (2007), in U.S. Survey Feet, with orthometric heights derived from NAVD 1988 using the Geoid03 geoid model.
 All benchmarks are assumed to be accessible and safe to occupy at the time of survey. If a benchmark is determined to be inaccessible or unsafe, it will not be collected.  If a benchmark has been destroyed or cannot be located, it will be documented and noted accordingly.
 Any destroyed or unusable benchmarks will be reestablished during a subsequent survey phase, and newly established benchmarks will be collected at an additional cost.  No gauge stations will be measured, and no total station or digital leveling methods will be utilized.

This scope of work and associated fee cover a single Geodetic Network survey. Based on past practice, these surveys have been performed on a bi‑annual basis, typically in July and December.

ADDITIONAL SERVICES
The following services are not included in this proposal, however, these and others can be provided at additional cost, upon request.
 Establishment of additional survey benchmarks
 Topographic and Boundary Survey

TERMS AND CONDITIONS
In order to convey a clear understanding of our mutual responsibilities under this proposal our standard Consultant Services Agreement is attached. Please sign both of these documents and return by email. These documents will serve as our Notice to Proceed. This proposal is valid for 30 days from the date above.

Respectfully,
Provost & Pritchard Consulting Group
Analisa Gonzales, PLS 9496 Gavin O’Leary, GISP 99023
Licensed Surveyor Director of Operations, GIS/Survey

TERMS AND CONDITIONS ACCEPTED
By (Client Name)
Davids Engineering on behalf of the Madera Subbasin May 4, 2026 Geodetic Network for Subsidence Monitoring Page 4 of 4
Job No.: 26-125
26-125_Subsidence Control Network_Proposal.docx

Signature

Printed Name

Title Date
Kaweah River
Kings River
Merced River
Tuolumne River
SanJoaquinRiver
SanJoaquinRiver
0 10 20
Miles
USBR Benchmark
Continuously Operating
Reference Station (CORS)
Waterway
Groundwater Basin DRAFT
Panoche Water District - Subsidence Control Network
Subsidence Monitoring Locations
5/7/2026 I:\Marketing\Proposals\2026\Panoche Water District - Subsidence Control Network 26-125\400 GIS\Map\PWD_Subsidence_Control_Network\PWD_Subsidence_Control_Network.aprx prepared by: benjamint California Department of Water Resources, Sources: Esri, TomTom, Garmin, FAO, NOAA, USGS, © OpenStreetMap contributors, and the GIS User Community, Sources: Esri, Vantor, Airbus DS, USGS, NGA, NASA, CGIAR, N Robinson, NCEAS, NLS, OS, NMA, Geodatastyrelsen, Rijkswaterstaat, GSA, Geoland, FEMA, Intermap, and the GIS user community

Madera City CouncilAugust 5, 2026

Madera City Council
August 5, 2026