|
1. REDUCTION TO TRANSIT FARES FOR SENIORS
DIMINUTION DES TARIFS DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN POUR LES PERSONNES ÂGÉES
|
That Council approve:
1. A new ticket fare structure for seniors such that one ticket constitutes a senior fare; and
2. That this change be incorporated into the 2011 OC Transpo Marketing Plan.
Que le Conseil approuve:
1. une nouvelle structure tarifaire pour les personnes âgées de sorte que le tarif pour personnes âgées équivaille à un billet; et
2. d’inclure ce changement dans le plan de marketing de 2011 d’OC Transpo.
Documentation
1. Seniors Advisory Committee’s report dated 11 August 2010 (ACS2010-CCV-SAC-0001)
2. Extract of Draft Minutes 48, Transit Committee meeting of 30 August 2010
Transit Committee/
Comité du transport en commun
and Council / et au Conseil
11 August 2010/ le 11 août 2010
Submitted by/Soumis par: Seniors Advisory Committee/
Comité consultatif sur les personnes âgées
Contact/Personne-ressource: Melinda Aston,
Committee Coordinator/coordonnatrice du comité consultatif
SUBJECT: |
|
|
|
|
OBJET: |
DIMINUTION DES TARIFS DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN POUR LES personnes âgées |
The Seniors Advisory Committee recommends that the Transit Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve a new ticket fare structure for seniors such that one ticket constitutes a senior fare; and
2. That this change be incorporated into the 2011 OC Transpo Marketing Plan.
Le Comité consultatif sur les personnes âgées recommande au Comité du transport en commun de recommander au Conseil :
1. d’approuver une nouvelle structure tarifaire pour les personnes âgées de sorte que le tarif pour personnes âgées équivaille à un billet; et
2. d’inclure ce changement dans le plan de marketing de 2011 d’OC Transpo.
BACKGROUND
Numerous studies have identified transportation as an essential feature for building age-friendly communities. Ottawa’s senior population (65+) is large and growing. The 2006 census showed 100,700 seniors representing 12% of the population.[1]
The current fare options for seniors on OC Transpo are as follows:
Cash: $3.25
Tickets: 2 tickets (total $2.50)
Monthly Pass: $36
Annual Pass: $395
In addition there is a Ride-Free-Wednesdays program which allows seniors to use OC Transpo with no fare requirement.
The main issue is that the lifestyle of most seniors requires them to use transit only on an infrequent basis. They thus find little need for a pass but at the same time find that the ticket requirement of $5.00 for a round trip can be a hardship.
DISCUSSION
Consideration of the feasibility and desirability of a reduced senior ticket fare included:
Senior fare comparison with other municipalities
Attachment 1 is a table showing the fare structure in 13 large Canadian cities. Following are some of the noteworthy deductions from the chart:
Cash Fares: Ottawa has the highest cash fare ($3.25) of the 13 cities surveyed.
Ticket Fares: Most cities offer a reduced price per trip for seniors if packs of 6 or more tickets are purchased (number of tickets varies by city). Ottawa does not offer this reduction. The ticket price per trip is the highest in Ottawa ($2.50 for 2 tickets).
Day Passes: Some cities offer a reduced day pass for seniors. Ottawa does not.
Weekly Passes: Some cities offer a reduced weekly pass for seniors. Ottawa does not.
Monthly Passes: Ottawa’s monthly pass for seniors ($36) is one of the lowest; only Edmonton and Saskatoon have lower monthly passes.
Annual Passes: Four cities offer annual passes. Calgary’s annual pass of $35 for seniors is the lowest. Additionally, Calgary and Edmonton have reduced annual passes for low income seniors.
The senior demographic and income levels
The senior demographic is growing and is spread throughout the City. Some of the areas showing the highest percentage increase in seniors are outside the core. The median income of seniors in Ottawa in 2006 was $30,022. However, 21% of senior men and 43% of senior women had incomes of less than $20,000 in 2006.[2]
Senior utilization of transit
Seniors, as a group, do not have the same regular requirement for travel as those who need it for employment or education. There are now many seniors who do not have a regular fixed schedule and most find little need to travel more than twice weekly. Also, a number of seniors are in facilities or use Para Transpo. It is difficult to get a good estimate of the actual number of seniors who use transit; however, OC Transpo staff estimated that only 10% of seniors over age 75 use OC Transpo[3]. Of those who use transit in Canada in 2003 Senior ridership was listed as 6% (latest available data).[4] Based on Ottawa’s forecast of a total of 102 million trips in 2010[5] then seniors would comprise about 6 million of that. From there it would be fair to go even further and extrapolate that approximately 15% of all seniors would be using OC Transpo at least on an intermittent basis – i.e. approximately 15,000 senior riders in Ottawa. Currently seniors monthly pass sales average around 8,000 riders that would leave approximately 7,000 more transient seniors who would pay with either cash or tickets.
Cash, pass or tickets
Currently seniors have to make a decision as to whether they should pay cash, buy tickets or buy a pass. Cash is the most expensive option and would not be the normal choice of seniors unless they did not have the opportunity to buy one of the alternatives. The seniors pass is currently the most economical if the senior plans to make more than 14 trips per month or approximately 2 round trips per week. We appreciate that the seniors pass already offers a significant reduction and for frequent travelers it works out to less than a dollar a trip. For those travelling less frequently, however, tickets are the best option.
The current 2 ticket fare equates to $2.50 but it is worth noting that “In 2010, the average fare after July 1 is projected to be $ 1.63, based on the pricing and marketing strategies outlined in the 2010 Marketing Plan”.[6]
Seniors generally use transit during off peak hours and present little extra burden on the system.
Financial impact
It is unlikely that there will be much of a reduction in the number of senior passes sold. This is because there are still many seniors who have regular transit requirements for employment, volunteer duties or other recurring needs. OC Transpo has no breakout for seniors using tickets but taking the high end assumption of 7,000 senior riders traveling 10 trips per month would equate to approximately 840,000 annual trips. The ticket usage rate is also a high end estimate, as seniors would also make use of the Ride-Free-Wednesdays program. Reducing the ticket requirement down to one ticket would thus produce a revenue shortfall of approximately $1,050,000. This represents approximately 2/3 of 1% of all OC Transpo ridership forecast revenues. The reduced revenue would be mitigated to some extent by increased travel by seniors due to the lower fare. If current users took one extra trip per week the whole shortfall would be almost eliminated. A similar saving would occur if we new users came on board to increase even slightly the actual number of seniors using OC Transpo.
The social benefit
We are encouraging the concept of aging in place, having seniors stay in their own homes. However, this does not mean that they should remain isolated and shut-in. OC Transpo at an affordable fare would encourage more seniors to get out, be more mobile, meet with other seniors, and participate in volunteer and social activities to have a more active and healthy lifestyle. As seniors get older many no longer drive and access to a friendly and reasonably priced public transit is essential for them.
RURAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no rural implications.
CONSULTATION
Transit Services Comments
Bus fares are based on the ability of specific groups to pay, which means that Transit offers many options for low income seniors, including free transit on Wednesdays and deeply discounted monthly passes. As well, Transit Services provides Social Services with 30,000 free bus tickets per month, with many of those offered to seniors.
Transit staff will be reviewing its fare products in preparation for the Presto Smartcard to be deployed during the fall of 2011. This new smartcard has the flexibility to load up a variety of fare products, including discounts and/or rewards for transit usage. At this time, it would be counter-productive to change the ticket structure so close to smartcard implementation.
Transit has been mandated to prepare a report on providing free bus passes for war veterans over 65 for the 2011 budget, as well as the financial impact of removing ticket “top-ups” for Community passes on Para Transpo. Both of these initiatives, if approved by Council, would benefit seniors.
CONCLUSION
Reducing the seniors fare to one ticket would bring it more closely in line with that offered in 12 other major Canadian cities. While Ottawa’s seniors pass is offered at a welcoming discount, the same is not true for other senior’s fares, including tickets. The pass system is not suitable for the lifestyle of many seniors and thus the ticket system is the best option for them. A single ticket fare is also very close to the average fare forecast to be paid by all transit users ($1.63). Seniors have worked long and hard to build this city, seniors are a major volunteer resource and seniors, as a group, have a relatively low income. The modest reduction in revenue, should that be the case, would be more than made up by the social benefit it would produce for our senior population.
The Seniors Advisory Committee recommends that the initiative of One Senior = One Ticket be forwarded to Council for their inclusion in the 2011 OC Transpo fare review.
LEGAL/RISK MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS
There are no legal or risk management impediments to implementing the recommendations of this report.
FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS
There are no financial impacts for 2010. Should Council approve the recommendations contained in this report, the resulting financial implications will be reflected in the 2011 draft budget request. As discussed under the Financial Impact section of the report, the impact of reducing the ticket requirement for seniors down to one ticket could result in an annual revenue reduction of $1.1 million.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTATION
Document 1 - Extract of Draft Minute from Seniors Advisory Committee, 2 June 2010.
Document 2 - Types of Fares and Passes in Selected Canadian Metropolitan Areas
DISPOSITION
Staff to implement City Council’s decision.
The SAC Coordinator to notify the Advisory Committee of City Council’s decision.
DOCUMENT 1
On June 2, 2010, the Seniors Advisory Committee approved the following motion:
Whereas seniors pay the regular adult OC Transpo fare of two tickets if they do not buy a monthly pass; and
Whereas seniors do not have the same need for a monthly pass as other riders since they travel more infrequently; and
Whereas OC Transpo ticket fares for seniors are the highest among major Canadian cities; and
Whereas seniors, as a group, have a low income level; and
Whereas there is a significant social and health benefit to giving seniors increased mobility; and
Whereas seniors normally use transit during off peak hours and thus do not add any burden or cost to the system;
Therefore Be it resolved that the Seniors Advisory Committee recommends that the Transit Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve a new ticket fare structure for seniors such that one ticket constitutes a senior fare; and
2. That this change be incorporated into the 2011 OC Transpo Marketing Plan.
CARRIED
DOCUMENT 2
Types of Fares and Passes in Selected Canadian Metropolitan Areas |
||||||||||
|
City |
Cash Price |
Ticket Pack |
Ticket Price per trip |
Daily Pass |
Weekly Pass |
Monthly Pass |
Annual Pass |
|||
|
Halifax |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.25 |
$18.00 for 10 |
$1.80 |
N/A |
N/A |
$70.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Senior |
$1.50 |
$13.00 for 10 |
$1.30 |
N/A |
N/A |
$52.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Montreal |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.75 |
$13.25 for 6 |
$2.21 |
$7.00 |
$20.50 |
$70.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
|
|
$21.00 for 10 |
$2.10 |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Senior |
$1.75 |
$7.50 for 6 |
$1.25 |
$7.00 |
$11.50 |
$38.75 |
N/A |
|||
|
|
|
$12.00 for 10 |
$1.20 |
|
|
|
|
|||
|
Ottawa |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$3.25 |
N/A |
$2.50* |
$7.50 |
N/A |
$91.50 |
$930.00 |
|||
|
Senior |
$3.25 |
N/A |
$2.50* |
$7.50 |
N/A |
$36.00 |
$395.00 |
|||
|
|
*Ottawa charges 2 tickets per trip. Tickets are $1.25 each. |
|||||||||
|
Toronto |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$3.00 |
$12.50 for 5 |
$2.50 |
$10.00 |
$52.00 |
$121.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Senior |
$2.00 |
$8.25 for 5 |
$1.65 |
$10.00 |
$52.00 |
$99.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Windsor |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.45 |
$21.30 for 10 |
$2.13 |
N/A |
N/A |
$79.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Senior* |
$1.70 |
$16.40 for 10 |
$1.64 |
N/A |
N/A |
$40.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
* Seniors in Windsor are 60+ |
||||||||||
|
London |
|
|||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.75 |
$9.50 for 5 |
$1.90 |
N/A |
N/A |
$81.00 |
N/A |
|||
|
Senior |
$2.75 |
$7.15 for 5 |
$1.43 |
N/A |
N/A |
$57.50 |
N/A |
|||
|
City |
Cash Price |
Ticket Pack |
Ticket Price per trip |
Daily Pass |
Weekly Pass |
Monthly Pass |
Annual Pass |
||
|
Winnipeg |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.35 |
$20.50 for 10 |
$2.05 |
N/A |
$20.50 |
$74.00 |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$1.85 |
$10.20 for 10 |
$1.02 |
N/A |
$10.25 |
$37.00 |
N/A |
||
|
Regina |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.50 |
$20,00 for 10 |
$2.00 |
$7.00 |
N/A |
$62.00 * |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$2.50 |
$20.00 for 10 |
$2.00 |
$7.00 |
N/A |
$62.00 * |
$202.00 |
||
|
* Regina has a 6 month pass for $101.00. Both the yearly and monthly passes equate to $16.00 per month. Regina also has a monthly low income pass of $20.00. Fares effective as of June 2010 |
|||||||||
|
Saskatoon |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.75 |
$21.00 for 10 |
$2.10 |
$6.95 |
N/A |
$71.00 |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$2.75 |
$21.00 for 10 |
$2.10 |
$6.95 |
N/A |
$20.00 |
$225.00 |
||
|
Saskatoon has a 3 and 6 month seniors pass of $63.00 and $120.75 respectively |
|||||||||
|
Calgary |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.75 |
$24.00 for 10 |
$2.40 |
$8.25 |
N/A |
$85.25* |
|
||
|
Senior |
$2.75 |
$24.00 for 10 |
$2.40 |
$8.25 |
N/A |
|
$35.00 |
||
|
* Calgary has a $41.50 regular low income monthly and a $15.00 senior low income annual pass. |
|||||||||
|
Edmonton |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.75 |
$22.50 for 10 |
$2.25 |
$8.25 |
N/A |
$81,50 |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$2.75 |
$19.25 for 10 |
$1.92 |
$8.25 |
N/A |
$12.50 |
$114.50* |
||
|
* Edmonton has a $49.50 low income Senior of annual pass. |
|||||||||
|
Metro Vancouver* |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.50 |
$21.00 for 10 |
$2.10 |
N/A |
N/A |
$81.00 |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$1.75 |
$17.00 for 10 |
$1.70 |
N/A |
N/A |
$46.50 |
N/A |
||
|
* Vancouver fares only relate to ZONE 1. Vancouver also has a low income annual pass of $45.00 |
|||||||||
|
Victoria |
|
||||||||
|
Regular |
$2.50 |
$22.25 for 10 |
$2.23 |
$7.75 |
N/A |
$80.00 |
N/A |
||
|
Senior |
$1.65 |
$15.00 for 10 |
$1.50 |
$5.50 |
N/A |
$46.00 |
N/A |
||
Reduction to Transit fares for seniors
DIMINUTION DES TARIFS DU TRANSPORT EN COMMUN POUR LES personnes âgées
ACS2010-CCV-SAC-0001 CITY-WIDE/ À L’ÉCHELLE DE LA VILLE
Ms. Dianne Breton, Vice-Chair of the Seniors’ Advisory Committee (SAC), felt the background research that accompanied this motion was comprehensive and compelling and that the motion itself offered both opportunity and solution. She viewed it as an opportunity to increase ridership and ticket sales for OC Transpo and an opportunity to enable seniors to remain healthy and connected to their city. She believed it would be a transportation solution for many seniors who did not regularly use public transportation for financial reasons. She went on to highlight some of the information contained in the background section of the report, noting that of 13 Canadian cities surveyed, Ottawa had the highest ticket price for seniors. She submitted that all other Canadian cities had recognized the importance of providing accessible and affordable public transit to their growing senior population with discounted senior ticket prices. She suggested the cost of a seniors’ monthly pass benefited those who worked or had regularly scheduled activities during the week but that it was not economical for seniors who travelled less frequently. She noted the median income of Ottawa seniors was a modest $30,000 and a significant percentage of seniors had incomes of less than $20,000. She maintained that this growing segment of the senior population would increase ridership and benefit from a reduced fare. She went on to talk about the social and health benefits of encouraging seniors to remain healthy, active and independent by making public transportation affordable. She remarked that the financial impact was estimated at approximately $1 million. She felt this was a high end estimate because ticket sales and seniors were not separate, therefore statistics were not available. With the current demographic trends, she believed that if current seniors took one extra trip per week, the projected shortfall would be eliminated. Further, she guessed that if more seniors started using transit because of the fare reduction, there would be an overall increase in revenue. She referenced two upcoming initiatives: the soon to be implemented smartcard technology, which would have the flexibility to load up a variety of fare products, including discounts; and the move towards allowing veterans to ride free. In closing, Ms. Breton suggested this motion was the next step to recognizing Ottawa seniors with an affordable single-ticket fare and she urged Committee to move it forward to Council.
Responding to questions from Councillor Bédard, Ms. Breton confirmed that the SAC report made reference to the fact that most seniors travelled during off-peak hours. However, she clarified that the intent was to obtain a reduced fare for seniors regardless of the time of day. She felt that to reduce fares only during off-peak periods would further complicate an already complex system. She maintained the objective was to get a fare system whereby one senior would get one ride for one ticket.
Ms. Jean McQuilliam, Ottawa Seniors Transportation Committee (OSTC), explained the OSTC’s objectives and listed a number of organizations in support of the SAC motion. She was disappointed that, in commenting on the report, staff had chosen not to comment on the many issues with respect to the growing and diverse senior population with different needs and instead, emphasized the unlikely scenario of an estimated $1 million budget shortfall. She felt that to focus only on this was misleading because statistics on senior ridership were not available. She argued that it is impossible to accurately say how much revenue was generated from such ridership, therefore it was not possible to accurately measure the impact on revenue. She submitted that with a reduction in ticket fares, seniors’ ridership would likely increase and offset the budget shortfall. She noted staff had not commented on the data provided in the report with respect to the majority of Canadian cities being sensitive to the different needs of seniors by offering reduced single ticket prices as well as reduced pass prices. She felt staff’s comment about the monthly pass being deeply discounted was deeply misleading. She maintained the pass was only economical for seniors with regularly scheduled outings whereas for others, a $36 per month bus pass was a large amount out of their budget if they did not use transit regularly. She suggested staff’s comments with respect to 30,000 free bus passes being issued monthly was also misleading because these were allocated to social services and health agencies dealing with vulnerable clients of all ages. She stressed that the SAC motion was about seniors with modest and low incomes, not the clientele of the social services department. She expressed support for the proposal to recognize veterans with free transportation. However, she remarked this primarily benefited males who served in the world wars and the Korean War. She maintained that the SAC motion was inclusive of all seniors, that it was intended not only to help financially, but to encourage them to participate more readily in social activities. As for staff’s suggestion that it would be counterproductive to change the fare structure prior to the smartcard implementation, she viewed this as a delay tactic, noting that seniors were particularly affected by delays. In closing, she urged Committee to approve the motion now.
Chair Cullen believed there was sympathy around the table with respect to seniors on modest or low incomes. However, he noted that the motion applied to all seniors and that there were a lot of seniors who could benefit from it who were not of low or modest income. He referenced the City’s community bus pass, which was for people on ODSP and was at the same level as the seniors’ bus pass. As he believed the objective was to help modest and low income seniors, and as he expected that Committee would refer this matter to the 2011 budget process, he wondered if this was something that could be explored in the interim. Ms. McQuilliam stressed that the intention of the SAC motion was to be all-inclusive. She suggested there was a social aspect for seniors in terms of the isolation that many suffered. She felt making single tickets available would make it easier for people to travel and it could not be restricted to those on low or modest incomes. On the other hand, she did not believe that seniors who had higher incomes would use OC Transpo.
Ms. Marilyn Hart, resident, indicated she had taken public transit all her life, that she was visually impaired, and that she enjoyed taking the bus, particularly during off-peak hours. She advised that she was also an urban planner and, at times, a transportation planner. She reported having worked for the City in the 70s and having helped design the transit system. She asked Committee to broaden the scope of the debate and think about the long range transportation planning issues. She stated her objectives were to get car driving seniors to think about taking OC Transpo for certain trips and to get seniors of all income groups to understand how the bus system worked. She noted most people only knew the buses in terms of commuting to and from work and she submitted that taking the bus at 10:00 a.m. was a vastly different and pleasant experience. She talked about the current fare structure, noting that the fare sign at the front of the bus indicated the cost was $3.25. She submitted that if a person lived in the Glebe and wanted to go to the Bytown cinema, they would not think of getting on the bus because they would think the fare was $3.25 times two. As a result, people tended to drive to places like the Bytown. She maintained that if there was a perceived bargain fare and if it was well advertised and posted on the front of the bus, some seniors would get out of their cars. Therefore, she wanted the $3.25 fare logo changed to advertised lower fares.
Mr. Chris Bradshaw, resident, noted that already the system gave reduced fares to seniors, but only the pass. He felt this was somewhat cynical because the pass was for people who made 20 or more trips per month, which was not the case for many seniors. However, he felt the pass looked good because of the inconsistency of the fare system. He noted that a drug store near his home sold about 70 seniors passes per month but even the seniors pass did not look like a very good deal anymore because of a 13% increase at the same time as the City was offering free Wednesdays. He wanted to make the point that the City already had only age taken into account in the bus pass, noting that children rode free up to a certain age and then they rode for one ticket for the next six years. Therefore, he submitted that the City had already created the one-ticket fare and he made the pitch that as life went through an increase of abilities and then a decline of abilities, the City should be consistent in the was transit fares were structured. He urged Committee to consider the one-ticket fare proposal.
Councillor Doucet referenced the notion of pass holders subsidizing ticket users and wondered how the City could get out of this. Mr. Bradshaw responded to the notion of subsidization by noting that suburban commuters bus rides were likely about ten times as long as seniors’ trips.
Chair Cullen noted that staff had estimated the budget impact at approximately $1M. However, he wondered if this would have an impact on the sales of seniors’ bus passes, which was already significantly discounted. Mr. Alain Mercier, General Manager of Transit Services, noted some delegations had talked about the price value aspect of how many trips and whether the passes make sense after so many trips. He confirmed that the majority of those who purchased passes did so because they had an ongoing need to travel more than once a week. He indicated staff did not have enough demographic analysis to be able to say whether there would be shifts in terms of people moving from the pass to tickets. However, he was confident that those who were at the cusp, in terms of their frequency of travel, would buy tickets rather than a pass if the end result was a lower cost.
Responding to a question from Councillor Legendre with respect to the notion of restricting this to off-peak periods, Mr. Mercier indicated the experience of most transit systems had been that when there were different fare structures at different times of day, the fare structures became too complex . Further, he advised that OC Transpo did not have the system capability to administer such a structure.
In response to a follow-up question from the Council about seniors below the poverty line, Mr. Mercier confirmed that there were programs that sought to include seniors where necessary, either through the community pass or free tickets. He noted these were not targeted programs. He indicated staff also did not have the full demographic profile of transit users in terms of how many would benefit from a greater control means testing on pricing for seniors. He advised that the Service’s goal, before the end of the year, was to get a better demographic profile of transit users. He also reported that staff was trying to get a quantitative assessment of how beneficial the free Wednesdays program had been. Indirectly, staff had noted trends of increased weekly usage of transit since introducing this program, meaning people who may not have regularly taken transit in the past, were more apt to do so now. He maintained that price was a factor in use of the system but the department needed better demographics in terms of the effects. He suggested that, should Committee members wish to ask staff to get a better economic and demographic profile, this could be done for the 2011 budget.
Chair Cullen read the SAC recommendation and noted that the usual practice for budget items like this was to refer them to the budget process, which would allow staff to do more work and consider the matter in the larger context of the budget. He indicated he was prepared to entertain a motion of referral or else Committee would move directly to the question at hand.
As no Committee member moved referral, Committee voted on the SAC recommendation.
The Seniors Advisory Committee recommends that the Transit Committee recommend Council:
1. Approve a new ticket fare structure for seniors such that one ticket constitutes a senior fare; and
2. That this change be incorporated into the 2011 OC Transpo Marketing Plan.
CARRIED