Looking to navigate both short and long-term budget crunches, Metro’s board on Thursday heard a variety of fare and service concepts to help meet those budget gaps.

The transit agency is grappling with what service will look like after the pandemic reshaped ridership and many workers are now staying home instead of taking the train or bus to work.

In the short term, Metro is exploring ways to increase revenue by raising Metrorail prices anywhere from 5 to 25%.

A 5% increase means rail fares could go from $2 to $6, depending on time and distance, to $2.10 to $6.50. A 25% increase would put fares between $2.50 and $7.50. Bus prices would rise from $2 to $2.10 or $2.50. It would be Metro’s first fare increase since 2017. It previously raised fares every second year.

“A fare increase, even a modest one, should be part of the package that moves forward for greater discussion,” said finance chair Matt Letourneau. “Everything around the world… has gone up in price.

“Obviously, we haven’t provided the level of service that we’ve wanted to over the last couple of years,  but I think that’s changing and improving, and we’re getting back to where we need to be. So I think that is something that (a fare increase) should be on the table.”

The fare hike alone would not meet Metro’s goals. Even raising fares a quarter would only raise an extra $44 million – just about a third of the $146 million budget gap for the next fiscal year. So Metro would need to find savings or more revenue elsewhere. Planners predict that Metro could lose 3 million to 19 million trips because of the hike, but gain $9 million to $44 million.

Metro could also try to save money by cutting service and jobs, but it can’t do that until the federal COVID relief funds run out later this year – and it’s not something the board seemed keen on doing.

General Manager Randy Clarke will bring his own budget proposal to the board this December. Then the board will start to finalize a proposal that will go out to the public next January and February. Board members would vote in March and any changes, including fare prices, would go into effect next July.

Longer-term proposals include drastic changes

In the long term, Metro is looking at simplifying its fare structure while also maintaining an equitable cost. Metro General Manager Randy Clarke has often said that WMATA has one of the most complicated fare tables in the world, as prices are based both on distance as well as peak-period premiums.

One concept would to be create a 3, 4, or 5-zone system that would charge different prices to go through different zones. Metro laid out a few examples.

“The zone-fare concept is flexible and can be shaped to desired policy outcomes,” Metro’s staff wrote. “Its complexity and impacts
on ridership, revenue, and equity would depend on those policy decisions.”

A flat fare system would mean riders would pay the same amount to go anywhere on the system, similar to New York City’s MTA, which charges $2.75.

“We’re not the New York City Subway, we are a hybrid system,” Clarke said. “We are a commuter rail, and a subway system combined – and that is a big difference.”

Metro could set the price at $2 or $3 or $4, but any of those options could have equity concerns. For instance, long-distance commuters could ride 30 miles for $3 dollars – but a lower-income rider going three or four stops would pay the same. Metro says it would gain riders if it charged $2 and lose riders if it charged $3 or $4.

A no-fare system would mean riders wouldn’t pay any money at the turnstile. Rather local governments would be paying Metro a $465 million subsidy to cover the cost of riding through taxes.

It would lower the barriers to transportation and grow ridership, but Metro says it could create crowding and security issues in the long term. It’s also unlikely that every jurisdiction would be willing to front that much money to pay for the service.

Metro could also simplify its current distance-based system by eliminating peak periods or rounding prices off at 25 cents.

It’s unclear if the status quo or the other concepts will win out. The board was mixed on the ideas.

D.C. representative Lucinda Babers says the zoned-fares reminded her of the old D.C. taxi map, which the District got rid of because it was so confusing, especially to tourists.

Board chair Paul Smedberg of Virginia said he likes the idea of the flat fare for simplicity’s sake. Board member Sarah Kline was not in favor of the zone-based concept.

Service Proposals Call For More Trains In The Core

Meanwhile, Metro also wants to refocus service increases on where most riders are – the core of the system. Metro is exploring bringing back “turnbacks” which turn trains around at designated areas to prioritize service to downtown.

Going forward with those decisions would reverse moves the board has made in the past to bring more service and convenience to the suburbs. But the pandemic ridership shows more of those suburbanites are staying home.

So Metro is exploring bringing back the Yellow Line ending at Mt. Vernon Square and the Red Line turnbacks at Silver Spring and Grovesnor-Strathmore.

Silver Line

Some expected Metro to announce an opening date for the Silver Line extension to Dulles Airport and beyond to Loudoun County, but those onlookers were disappointed.

Clarke says there are last-minute items to complete like adding signage and light bulbs that were missed before. He expects to announce a firm opening date next week. Then the transit agency can submit and get concurrence on its safety certification from the Metrorail Safety Commission. Metro says it wants the line open before the Thanksgiving travel season.