September 13, 2007
Fare Options?
UPDATE: The Metro Board has put the proposed fare hikes on hold, saying they would like more details about the proposals before they would approve public hearings. They voted to hold a special informational committee meeting on Sept. 27.
More than a year ago, then interim Metro Chief Dan Tangherlini began uttering those two little words no transit rider likes to hear: fare increase. At the time though, our favorite transit official was reassuring us that we wouldn't be likely to see an increase until 2008. Turns out Dan was right on the money. Current General Manager John Catoe went before the Metro Board of Directors today to recommend a moderate system-wide fare increase, going into effect in January 2008.
According to Catoe's proposal, the base fare would go up $0.45 on Metrorail, raising the minimum to fare to $1.80 (five cents more than was originally reported in the Washington Post this morning) and the maximum to $4.50. At $1.50, Metrobus riders would pay $0.25 more per ride, and parking rates would increase by a buck a day. The Metro Board, consisting of appointed members from each jurisdiction Metro serves, will hold public hearings on the proposal, and make a final decision on any increase. There is no schedule for either the hearings or a final decision, but Catoe warned that the later a fare increase goes into effect, the higher it will have to be.
Now, no one enjoys paying more for something tomorrow than they do today. Especially when it comes to a daily necessity, even a moderate increase adds up fast, especially for lower income folks. However, no one can accuse Metro of springing this out of the blue. The increase would be the first in four years for Metro, and like we said, official have been warning that the time for a price hike was growing near. Back in December, Metro officials unveiled a set of fare increases that was much larger and more extensive, complete with complicated rules and incentives for who would be charged what fare when. When that proposal was eventually (and rightfully) rejected, Catoe warned that a fare increase was still imminent.
Photo by Samer Farha
At the time, Catoe also proposed a bold idea to tie Metro fares to inflation, perhaps through the Consumer Price Index. His hope was both to provide Metro with funding to match its rising expenses, while also ensuring fare increases were more predictable for riders. Considering Metro's steadily increasing costs and deteriorating infrastructure caused by a long backlog of deferred maintenance, we thought this was a novel approach, and we still do. Frankly, we were a little disappointed not to see it in today's proposal, but perhaps it is better to tackle one controversial issue at a time.
Whatever the timeline, and regardless of the inevitable public outcry, a fare increase on Metro seems to be unavoidable. On the whole, we have a great system that, while certainly in need of a lot of improvement, provides benefits to the D.C. area that justify its costs. Hopefully, most riders will realize this, and accept the higher fares with only a grumble or two.
At the same time, we'd be remiss not to note (again) that Metro remains the only major transit system in the country that still does not have a dedicated source of funding to tackle lingering maintenance issues and increase and improve service. Unfortunately, that decision remains in the hands of Congress, Virginia, and Maryland, and likely will for some time. The worst part is that, unless Congress and D.C.'s stately neighbors come through with the cash, riders can expect the next fare increase much sooner than four years from now.
|
Now is the time for Metro to offer good discounts for people who buy Monthly or yearly fare cards as the London and Paris systems do.
I am glad that I am not poor and don't have to suffer the petty indignities of mass transit.
London and Paris also have stations and escalators full of advertising. Our system has like 3 posters advertising military aircraft or something.
I would feel better about paying more for riding the increasingly lousy Metro if it seemed like they were trying to make the most of what they have with more advertising.
After all if ads can keep the whole internet running, they ought to be able to fund one crummy subway.
While I agree the reasoning behind Metro's fare hike, I still don't see how they're going to convince suburban riders not to forgo Metro all together and just drive in. Considering it already costs about $10 per day to commute from the burbs (parking + fares), what incentive do the suburbanites have to use Metro when it costs $12-$15 per day to commute?
Maryland and Virginia should finally admit that their residents use Metro and pony up some spare change for the poor, dear thing.
Price increases are not unacceptable, but the lack of a dedicated source of funding for repairs is disgraceful.
I'd have no problem with a fare increase if it actually meant that I'd have reliable service. My morning bus simply fails to show up at least twice a week and that's unacceptable.
we need to start really subsidizing transit instead of marking more money for road construction and repair.
free, clean, reliable, convenient transit is the only way to start replacing the huge numbers of vehicles on the roads.
I wonder what role the federal government's transit subsidy plays in the decision of WMATA to raise fares, since a fare increase will likely be matched by subsidy increase. The result is that for me, and the thousands of other federal commuters, the fare increase has no effect at all.
I wonder if there is another transit system in the US, or the world, in which the largest employer in the metro area essentially pays the fares of its employees.
I know where you're going, so I don't want to mince words, but fare increases have a lot more impact on people than a potential grumble or two. 45 cents per trip equates to over $20 per month. Chump change for many of us, but when thrown on top of the already high fares for some of the longer commutes, and you're looking at a potential $225 a month just for the fare, let alone parking costs, etc. #4 is right, by comparison, a monthly parking space downtown seems like a bargain. We need either a workable bulk discount, regionalized/dedicated funding, or both, and fast. And if all we're paying for is today's operation and not preventive maintenance and enhancement for the future, then we're not solving the problem.
yes. we need a monthly or yearly pass. like ANY OTHER METRO SYSTEM...not just london or paris. i mean, hello, new york city has an UNLIMITED pass for a month for less than 80 dollars. it costs me 160 + each month for metro/bus. seriously, pretty soon, im going to start driving to work. much cheaper, even with my gov. subsidy to ride public transit.
#8
The IRS allows $110 (+ or - a few dollars), per month for transit subsidies per employee. Anything over that amount is considered taxable income. Congress has the authority to raises that ceiling, but I wouldn’t hold my breath.
Let's just double the bus fares to $2.50, triple the metro fares to start at $4.00, and charge $20/day for parking. Then, nobody will take metro and the system won't have to deal with all those pesky "customers" who are always breaking things. It will be an un-crowded, clean, and self-supporting model of transit efficiency.
Plus, it would give everybody in the area the benefit of getting the most out of all the taxpayer resources that go to road construction!!!!
Yay, it's a win-win!
Maryland and Virginia should finally admit that their residents use Metro and pony up some spare change for the poor, dear thing.
I can't speak for Maryland, but how exactly has Virginia not "ponied up some spare cash?" Do the words "$300 million dollars in NVTA tax increases" mean anything to you?
Krisa - what you're not accounting for is the cost of gas with driving. Assuming 30 miles total per day, that's a gallon of gas. A gallon of gas is approximately $3 right now. That's an extra $65-$70 per month for gas.
Not to mention, part of public transportation costs are subsidized/tax free at many firms.
If you still think a parking spot is worth it, wait until the demand for a spot increases. Per day and monthly rates will skyrocket too.
Hope you suburbanites enjoy your sprawl. The couple-hundred dollars I save in commuting can be applied to my apartment rent, making it almost identical cost of living in the burbs and without the commuting nightmare.
That's not so bad....45 cents in four years.
This is absurd. Base fare in 2001 was $1.10. If they raise it to $1.80, that's a 64% increase in seven years. Have the local subsidies risen 64% in seven years? Not even close. Metro riders cover a higher percentage of costs than any other system in the nation.
Maryland, get your shit together and approve a dedicated source of funding for Metro. It's your residents who clog the crash-and-burn Red Line everyday, anyway.
I wish Metro could cease service to Maryland until they get they're collective heads out of their asses and start taking responsibility for the commitment they made not only to their people, but the entire National Capital Region. They have billions for the ICC boondoggle, but they can't pass a sales tax increase to fund Metro?
I have to agree with #14. I moved to the 'burbs temporarily a few years back. I got smart and moved back into the city. I save so much money on gas and repair costs. Both from a financial and mental health standpoint, living in town works out better.
PLASTER THE DAMN CATACOMBS aka stations and TRAINS WITH ADS, ADS and MORE ADS. The lack of advertising in sucha large system is mind blowing. I want to see American Apparel crotch shot ads during my commute each morning.
IF the increased fares translate to better service, I won't complain. It's a big if, though.
Agree with #14 and #17. I used to live in Arlington, and I spent $100 a month on gas, mostly because of the commute. Now I walk to work. My rent is also $300 less a month, and I share a very nice and spacious rowhouse with my girlfriend instead of a teeny tiny studio.
I've come to the realization that you really don't save any money living in the suburbs, unless you live very, very far away from the city, and then you spend all your free time commuting.
#4 is right. When I lived in VA, the cost of commuting by metro was much greater than the cost of driving, even accounting for gas. My employer provided free parking, so maybe if that was a factor the metro would have been a viable option. Still, it took 3 times as long as driving, so it would have to be a significant savings in order to get me on the metro.
#14--enjoy paying your rent. I'll enjoy the $60,000 in equity I've built up in my suburban house over the past three years, plus the $3,000 I get every year deducting my mortgage interest from my income tax. That covers a lot of fare increases. I'm willing to pay more for Metro fare if it means I'm not flushing my money down the toilet paying rent on a tiny apartment in DC. And I get to live in a real state.
If a fare increase allows Metro to add additional trains, improve maintenance, and continue to improve what is, overall, a nice system, then I'm all for it. I think it's unreasonable to protest such fare changes given that the last one was almost 4 years ago.
I agree that the Metro should offer discounted monthly and annual passes. There must be some reason why they have not elected to do so?
Also, I think that Metro should also allow transfers only with SmartTrip cards, eliminating the small paper passes used in Metro-to-bus and bus-to-bus transfers currently. With this change, Metro should then enable bus-to-Metro transfers.
Despite the overcrowding and rash of incidents lately, I think we should be thankful for the system that we have. I'll take Metrorail anyday over the systems of NYC, Boston, Philly, and Chicago. It's fast, it's comfortable, the stations are air conditioned, and it tells you when it's coming!
BostonRay remembers: The Boston subway has monthly cards for about $70 but one could use them for unlimited rides in that month. If one was going home from work and stopped off to shop or ride on weekends it would still cost no more. If you took 10 trips in a day the price was the same. It was well worth it. Here, with the Smartcards you get no breaks at all.
Oh, equity is so wonderful. Except that you can't sell a piece of your house. I put my money in the stock market, rent a great place in downtown DC, and have watched my stocks soar.
Yep, equity is great. So was the $3500 check I got from the IRS last year, and the $1,000 I got from the state of Maryland. So is my garden, my school system, not living in a neighborhod where I have to worry about getting shot, and having two senators and a representative who actually vote in Congress. And my mortgage payment doesn't go up, unlike the year my rent went up by 12%. And in two or three years when I sell my house and move out of DC, which I should have done years ago, I'll have $50,000 toward a new house. Beats the $44 in interest I got on my last apartment deposit.
#1, #23 -- presumably the reason metro doesn't t offer monthly passes is because of the zone system that charges by distance. In contrast, New York has a flat $2 fare per trip, whether you are going two stops or riding to the end of the line. If it costs people here $150 per month to commute from the outer stations on the system, offering those folks unlimited passes for $80 or $90 per month would be a huge fare cut, not a fare increase. Its hard to see how that would make metro more money. And if unlimited passes cost $150 per month, its hard to imagine many people would buy them.
But maybe some sort of unlimited monthly pass that was valid only in some inner core area would make sense? For example, it costs me about $75 per month to commute every day from Arlington into downtown DC. Some people in my position might be willing to pay an extra $10 to buy an unlimited pass that they could also use on the weekends, for running errands, etc. That would bring in some additional money, and add more riders at off-peak times when the system can handle them. I think the key would be to have the monthly passes priced a little higher than what people would pay anyway to commute, but not too much higher, so people are willing to buy it and ride a bit outside their regular commute.
#26 Perhaps a solution is similar to the metrorail "short rail pass", where the pass is good for rides cheaper than a certain amount (currently $2.70), but you have to add fare for longer rides. I bet the smartrip card is technologically capable of doing this, but I haven't gotten WMATA interested, even with repeated requests.
We definitely should have some sort of monthly pass available, most transit systems have a monthly pass available for about 35 times the average fare. That essentially tells me that twice a day commuters get any additional rides free.
The best deals are the annual passes, which are typically only 360 average fares (about $900), so if you ride for your commute every day you get a discount.
The passes are much more popular with the fixed rate or zone transit systems.
M. Perkins