A little morning moment of Zen from the Twitter feed of GGW contibuter (and ideal Metro board member if he had Thursdays free) Michael Perkins.
Only one more month of being blissfully ignorant about next year's metro budget deficit. Come on, $200m!
If this becomes reality, what options does Metro have? Rail fares got hiked obscenely already so that's off the table and riders will be wiser to any increases this time. Any bus-only hike would get derailed by Jim Graham working alone even if the board voted 11-1 for it. Charging for parking on weekends would actually lose money as it'd drive riders and fare revenue away. The Flx's have to go, so rejecting the last of the LFA's might not be an option. Closing stations on weekends could work, but the downside is what WMATA wanted (Deanwood, Cheverly) conflicts with what logically would work best (Judiciary Square, Federal Center SW, Virginia Square).
I think the only solution would be to get dirty and do things people won't like. Cut and simplify some routes. End the east-of-the-Anacostia $1 fare. Try to renegotiate the WMATA contract with ATU 689 if possible as its requirements are hurting the agency. Gang up on Graham if he tries to hurt WMATA to help a minority. And people wonder why WMATA should be federalized or declare bankrupty, there's no easy solution that will keep everyone happy. Someone will have to get hurt and it can't be the rail riders once again.
What is the "East of Anacostia $1 fare"? Is that advertised anywhere? What routes does that apply to?
They will definitely have to cut service and likely raise (bus) fares. It the service cuts are steep enough, that just may retire all of the Flxes anyway.
Quote from: Tritransit Area on August 19, 2010, 10:38:05 AM
What is the "East of Anacostia $1 fare"? Is that advertised anywhere? What routes does that apply to?
They will definitely have to cut service and likely raise (bus) fares. It the service cuts are steep enough, that just may retire all of the Flxes anyway.
The fare is under the Fares section for Metrobus. I really don't see the reason why they need to have a special fare just like for the Fairfax County routes.
Quote from: 79MetroExtraMD on August 19, 2010, 01:01:27 PM
Quote from: Tritransit Area on August 19, 2010, 10:38:05 AM
What is the "East of Anacostia $1 fare"? Is that advertised anywhere? What routes does that apply to?
They will definitely have to cut service and likely raise (bus) fares. It the service cuts are steep enough, that just may retire all of the Flxes anyway.
The fare is under the Fares section for Metrobus. I really don't see the reason why they need to have a special fare just like for the Fairfax County routes.
From what I remember reading somewhere, it was a concession made to riders once Anacostia station opened to help lessen the sting for those whose buses used to go downtown which were forced onto Metro. Nowdays I can't see the sense in it since one needs a Smartrip to transfer and a Smartrip is going to add 50 cents for a transfer regardless of route. Even prior to the end of paper transfers, one had to pay full fare for a transfer. With Smartrip being cut down to $2.50, there is really no excuse for anyone to pay cash anymore. The cost would be recouped in a week's worth of single-ride bus rides if one is paying cash.
(the subsidy for Fairfax County-only routes ended last year).
To add on this further, another response from the aforementioned Michael Perkins.
there's always the option of peak rail fare increases (instead of bus-only increases), we haven't had many of thoseI know there has been only one peak rail-only increase in Metro history (the 2008 increase that also split cash and Smartrip bus fares), but I think a peak rail-only fare increase would be playing with fire if put into place so soon after a major increase. Look at how this increase was botched and all the backlash from it that is still going. Metro got lucky but if people were as informed now as they were six months ago I bet you peak-of-the-peak would not have reared its botched head. With social media's high level of use here and the growing Metro hate it grows, mobilizing people is easy.
Unless someone wants to propose some crazy idea such as flat-faring off-peak rail to make more revenue from short trip riders, I think rail should be off-limits for FY2012. Besides, didn't Metro promise to never do rail fare hikes in back-to-back years?
QuoteFrom what I remember reading somewhere, it was a concession made to riders once Anacostia station opened to help lessen the sting for those whose buses used to go downtown which were forced onto Metro. Nowdays I can't see the sense in it since one needs a Smartrip to transfer and a Smartrip is going to add 50 cents for a transfer regardless of route. Even prior to the end of paper transfers, one had to pay full fare for a transfer. With Smartrip being cut down to $2.50, there is really no excuse for anyone to pay cash anymore. The cost would be recouped in a week's worth of single-ride bus rides if one is paying cash.
(the subsidy for Fairfax County-only routes ended last year).
This is correct. I'm sure someone down there will find a way to try keeping the low fare around (calling Marion Barry...), but I think Jason is right in saying this is a discount that has served its purpose and probably ought to be discontinued. Personally, and I've said this before, WMATA could have done a much better job in the way it transitioned from paper transfers to Smartrip transfers for all modes. I would have rather seen a rollout and revolutionizing of the fare structure similar to the way MetroCard Gold was rolled out in 1997.
QuoteUnless someone wants to propose some crazy idea such as flat-faring off-peak rail to make more revenue from short trip riders, I think rail should be off-limits for FY2012. Besides, didn't Metro promise to never do rail fare hikes in back-to-back years?
I don't recall such a promise being made. Personally, I think WMATA should adopt a policy of raising the fare every so often to adjust for cost of living adjustments and inflation at a minimum, rather than go 8 years without raising fares once. That said, I agree with the notion that flat-faring off peak riding is crazy (and probably won't change the revenue situation anyway), and agree with the notion that another increase in FY12 is probably not going to be taken well, especially if it is more than an across the board 5-10 cent increase. My preference would be a pledge from the board to order the staff to do a full evaluation of the current bus routes in their entirety and to identify routes, lines, trips, special segments, etc. that can be streamlined or cut entirely to reduce costs, or raise the bus fares as necessary to cover the costs of those items.
Let's put some of the blame for the botched peak of the peak implementation where it belongs. The board was told by the staff if they made a decision as late as they did, there was the risk of not being ready to roll out the peak of the peak on time. The board didn't approve the fare increases until the last possible moment. Some of the issues might have cropped up anyway if the board had finished its work earlier, but the staff would have had more time to deal with them.
Quote from: WMATAGMOAGH on August 19, 2010, 02:17:01 PM
QuoteFrom what I remember reading somewhere, it was a concession made to riders once Anacostia station opened to help lessen the sting for those whose buses used to go downtown which were forced onto Metro. Nowdays I can't see the sense in it since one needs a Smartrip to transfer and a Smartrip is going to add 50 cents for a transfer regardless of route. Even prior to the end of paper transfers, one had to pay full fare for a transfer. With Smartrip being cut down to $2.50, there is really no excuse for anyone to pay cash anymore. The cost would be recouped in a week's worth of single-ride bus rides if one is paying cash.
(the subsidy for Fairfax County-only routes ended last year).
This is correct. I'm sure someone down there will find a way to try keeping the low fare around (calling Marion Barry...), but I think Jason is right in saying this is a discount that has served its purpose and probably ought to be discontinued. Personally, and I've said this before, WMATA could have done a much better job in the way it transitioned from paper transfers to Smartrip transfers for all modes. I would have rather seen a rollout and revolutionizing of the fare structure similar to the way MetroCard Gold was rolled out in 1997.
I think that the reason why nothing was shaken up was that Metro assumed the upgrades to Smartrip would be made on time and not pushed back countless times. They decided to do it screwed up than not do it at all which is typical Metro planning (just like when it is to not put penalties for lateness into a contract).
As for the Anacostia subsidy, it's one in the long line of things Metro needs to put their foot down for because they can't afford it. Yes, it will suck for the worst-off, but have we ever heard about the worst off in other cities who pay more? It's another sign that the people with their hands in Metro are a couple decades behind the times.
QuoteUnless someone wants to propose some crazy idea such as flat-faring off-peak rail to make more revenue from short trip riders, I think rail should be off-limits for FY2012. Besides, didn't Metro promise to never do rail fare hikes in back-to-back years?
QuoteI don't recall such a promise being made. Personally, I think WMATA should adopt a policy of raising the fare every so often to adjust for cost of living adjustments and inflation at a minimum, rather than go 8 years without raising fares once. That said, I agree with the notion that flat-faring off peak riding is crazy (and probably won't change the revenue situation anyway)
It's crazy but it could nominally help since it'd get a lot more money from those taking shorter trips and it could force the shortest trips onto Metrobus.
Quoteand agree with the notion that another increase in FY12 is probably not going to be taken well, especially if it is more than an across the board 5-10 cent increase. My preference would be a pledge from the board to order the staff to do a full evaluation of the current bus routes in their entirety and to identify routes, lines, trips, special segments, etc. that can be streamlined or cut entirely to reduce costs, or raise the bus fares as necessary to cover the costs of those items.
If a fare increase went into place in which the funds would be dedicated to the repair and upkeep of the system, people might go for it. Problem is Metro might dip into that till too just like DC did for the 5-cent bag fee which was supposed to go to cleaning
Maryland's trash from the Anacostia but got diverted to the general fund. Otherwise, it's too soon and riders are too sore to make a rail increase an issue.
I'm for restructuring bus routes too, problem is that Metro lives in a culture of fear of having to cry for mercy and do dirty things that have to be done. They have to do things that people will not like and will cry racism on for the survival of the agency since nothing is sustainable in its current state. Metro needs to realize this.
To quote the current White House chief of staff, 'never let a crisis go to waste'. WMATA should take a page from Chicago's playbook and use this to push for all of the route changes they've been wanting to do but haven't been allowed to by the politicians. Announce a major service cut unless they receive more money and/or the unions agree to negotiate, and be fully prepared to implement the plan. CTA received a lot of grief for its service cuts but they appear to have been smartly done given the difficult circumstances – some commuters lost express runs or had a one-seat ride replaced with a mid-route transfer, but almost everyone can still get where they need to go and the initial uproar died down pretty quickly.
Quote from: RailBus63 on August 20, 2010, 09:34:56 AM
To quote the current White House chief of staff, 'never let a crisis go to waste'. WMATA should take a page from Chicago's playbook and use this to push for all of the route changes they've been wanting to do but haven't been allowed to by the politicians.
Save for Graham and maybe Barry, it isn't the politicians more than it is the fear of getting longtime, transit-dependent riders angry. I read something on some blog along the lines of "if they cut the routes, a lot of old women won't be able to get to church on Sunday and will be angry." Again, shades of a DC that existed early in the existence of WMATA but is dying now.
Any round of route reductions will be "poor" DC vs. "rich" DC/VA/MD. This is one area where Chicago has wiggle room that DC does not especially since "poor" DC can play against the "newcomers" who get ignored in these cases.
QuoteAnnounce a major service cut unless they receive more money and/or the unions agree to negotiate, and be fully prepared to implement the plan. CTA received a lot of grief for its service cuts but they appear to have been smartly done given the difficult circumstances – some commuters lost express runs or had a one-seat ride replaced with a mid-route transfer, but almost everyone can still get where they need to go and the initial uproar died down pretty quickly.
To do this would mean that WMATA would need to be proactive which is something they do not know how to do. If they were proactive, I think the fare increases would've been a little more equitable, some cuts would have passed, and they would've said no to ATU 689 forcing them to re-hire felons. I think it might be time to play the "if you don't budge, things will get much worse" card to the two biggest opponents, ATU 689 and the poor advocates. Rail's been through enough abuse and always is the easiest thing to cut. It's bus's turn to take it on the chin.
The poor will manage with cuts. The poor in New York managed with cuts and have never had a subsidy for the poorest areas. Why should the poor in DC be any different?