Skip to Content
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Streetsblog Los Angeles home
Log In
fares - hikes, fareless

Metro Memo Quietly Responds to Board and Public Fare Increase Concerns

Dana Gabbard testifying before the Metro Board fare restructuring hearing in March 2014. Photo: Metro's The Source
Dana Gabbard testifying before the Metro Board fare restructuring hearing in March 2014. Photo: Steve Hymon via Metro's The Source
Dana Gabbard testifying before the Metro Board fare restructuring hearing in March 2014. Photo: Metro's The Source

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 while continuing to have mostly free parking at its rail stations and park and ride lots, a question that this blog has also raised.

Toward the conclusion of the hearing, several Metro board members posed questions of their own. Metro CEO Art Leahy responded, and promised to have agency staff research and provide written responses in "a week to 10 days"  (Meeting Audio File at 4:15:50).

I recently submitted a request to Metro's Records Management Department to obtain a copy of the response which I thought likely had been distributed directly to the board members as a "board box" communication. I soon discovered it was only this past Friday, May 9th, that the memo titled Response to Inquiries From March 29 2014 Public Hearing (Fare Restructuring) was belatedly ready for distribution. 

Metro's  response memo addresses not only the queries of its board members, but also issues and questions raised repeatedly by the public in their comments.

Many members of the Metro board have raised various concerns regarding agency revenue. Among these are:

From these concerns, it's clear to me that many on the Metro Board hope that some source of additional revenue can be found to allow at least a partial reduction in the size of the fare increase. I think it is possible, but it looks like it will be a complicated, and likely contentious, process to navigate.

All in all, I am sure the Board meeting on Thursday, May 22nd, at which the fare changes will be discussed will be a very long one.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Los Angeles

UCLA Report Shows How Freeway Construction Last Century Was Used to Destroy and Divide Communities of Color

“Understanding the history of racism in freeway development can inform restorative justice in these areas.”

November 26, 2025

Wednesday’s Headlines

ICE, Vernon sues Metro, first Measure HLA Board of Public Works appeals, Metro LIFE program, gondola, Santa Monica vs. Waymo, Pasadena, car-nage and more

November 26, 2025

CicLAvia Melrose Avenue meets Stranger Things Season 5 – Open Thread

Tens of thousands of people enjoyed a car-free Melrose Avenue and... Hey was that a demogorgon that just rode past me?

November 25, 2025

Tuesday’s Headlines

ICE, Burbank, Inglewood, Santa Monica vs. Waymo, Pasadena, OC, car-nage, and more

November 25, 2025

Metro November 2025 Board Committee Round-Up: Gondola, Valley Light Rail, Open Streets, and More

More open streets funding (maybe), East San Fernando Valley rail, battery-electric buses, and second time around gondola approval

November 21, 2025
See all posts