This Post Brought to You By the Number 33

One BRU Member, with the help of a translator, slams fare policy plan
While the two issues covered below may dominate the coverage of today’s meeting, the most important story of the day was the somewhat schizophrenic behavior by the Board when it comes to their long-term budget issues and fare policies.

First, the Board approved releasing Metro’s long range plan for public comment. A final draft will be ready for release in mid-March for public comment. The final plan could be voted on as early as the June Board Meeting.

So, what’s the problem? Metro’s plan counts on a farebox recovery ratio, meaning the total cost of the trip that is paid for by the rider, of 33%. Currently, even after the recent fare hike, Metro is "recovering" 28% of the cost of each trip. To cover that gap, Metro would have to increase fares at least as much as they did in the most recent fare increase.

While opening up the plan for public comment was relatively uncontroversial, except for a coalition of government officials lobbying for inclusion of the I-710 Tunnel Project; a plan to adopt a fare policy based on reaching the same 33% fare box recovery ratio was met with stern opposition. This policy would lead to fare hikes by 2010 and was proposed response to projected operating deficits far into the future.
16 speakers of all races, classes and genders strode to the podium to denounce the plan, claiming that it was everything from an assault on civil rights to a perversion of the public process. BRU activist Manuel Criollo claimed that any plan that would increase bus fares was especially repugnant after a presentation of a "long range plan that reads like Disney Land" for more well off communities such as Santa Monica and Marina del Rey.
Ultimately, the Board put off voting on the new fare policy for another month so staff could remove or modify the language that would force the board to increase fares by 2010. The decision to put off the vote didn’t sit well with Board Chair Pam O’Connor who said noted that passing a fare plan with a firm recovery ratio will take the surprise out of fare hikes. "We’re going to have to deal with this (projected operating deficits) sometime."
  • LAofAnaheim

    We need to act on congestion charging, increased city tax on parking, no free parking for hybrids, etc… Let’s start charging the car driving public, not the transit riders. Isn’t this a double-tax for transit riders? (note: ironic arguement to those who argue against ‘congestion charging’)

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Are Free and Low Cost Transfers the Key to Fixing Metro’s Operations Mess?

|
Photo:CJaneBuy/Flickr Without some shocking turn of events, 48% of Metro passengers (seniors and students are exempted…this time) will see a fare increase this July.  For whatever reason, last Saturday’s "Special Board Meeting" held at Metro’s headquarters was sparely attended.  Perhaps because the hikes were viewed as inevitable, perhaps because the hearing was on a Saturday, […]

Thoughts on Metro’s Fare Restructuring

|
(I want to be explicit this is solely my own opinion, and in no way endorsed by either Streetsblog or Southern California Transit Advocates – DG But I can’t help notice that So.CA.TA. has a special meeting just to discuss the changes this Saturday. – DN) Metro staff recently released two options for fare restructuring […]

Metro Memo Quietly Responds to Board and Public Fare Increase Concerns

|
On March 29th, Metro held a public hearing on its proposal to restructure fares. At that meeting, I presented the position of Southern California Transit Advocates. Among other stakeholders at the March 29th hearing was the Sierra Club Angeles Chapter Transportation Committee, represented by its co-chair Darrell Clarke. He pointedly asked why Metro would raise fares […]

This Time, It Really Would Be a Restructuring

|
One of the more maddening parts of covering and discussing the mass transit system in Los Angeles is a fare structure that, quite honestly, doesn’t make a lot of sense. Fares vary wildly depending on whether one is riding Metro or a local system. Transfers are rare among agencies, and difficult for new riders to […]

Times: Metro Should Raise Fares

|
The Times wants to raise fares on transit riders. Photo: Pgsvenk/Flickr In today’s Los Angeles Times, the local paper of record follows up on this weekend’s look at Metro’s operational funding crisis with an editorial urging the Metro Board to increase fares to help close the agency’s roughly quarter of a billion annual deficit for […]

Editorial: Why Raise Metro Fares While Giving Away Metro Parking?

|
Metro is proposing to increase, or restructure, its $1.50 base transit fare to $1.75 later this year, with further increases planned in 2017 and 2020. Metro anticipates that this will increase its fare recovery – the percentage of operations costs that are paid for by fare revenues – from 25 percent to 33 percent. Metro foresees […]