WaPo Editorial on Low Metrobus Fares & WMATA Board Structure

[WMATAGMOAGH]

In today's Washington Post, there is a very well written editorial that echoes many posts that Wayne, among others, has made here on this forum.  It also touches up on some ideas I wanted to share with others here about the current issues facing WMATA in a new thread, that I may (or may not) eventually get around to composing.  Here is the editorial:

Charity on wheels
    [size=-1]  Sunday, May 23, 2010;  A16 
  [/size] 
 
  NOT MANY THINGS in life are impervious to price increases, but riding a  Metrobus is close. In the past two decades, the price of a bus ride has  risen by an average of just a penny a year, less than half the rate of  inflation. At the same time, the cost of that ride borne by Metro has  roughly tripled. The result is that Metro's subsidy for bus passengers  is now on the order of $350 million annually. That's more than twice  its subsidy for rail passengers, who comprise almost two-thirds of the  system's total daily riders. 
On its face, this is unfair to rail passengers, whose fares have  soared in recent years as bus fares have barely inched up. Jim Graham  (D-Ward 1), the D.C. Council member who has championed bus riders on  the Metro board since 1999, argues that (mainly urban) bus passengers  on average are poorer and more transit-dependent than (mainly suburban)  rail passengers, so subsidizing them at a higher rate is fair. Wielding  the threat of vetoing Metro budgets, Mr. Graham has beaten back  repeated attempts to increase bus fares. 
The problem is that artificially low bus fares are contributing to  Metro's status as a pauper transit system now trying to close a $189  million deficit in next year's budget of $1.4 billion. Fares paid by  bus passengers cover barely 30 percent of the real cost of the ride,  lower than the historical norm; by contrast, rail fares cover about 80  percent of the real cost, higher than the historical norm. Bus fares  also lag behind those of most other major transit systems around the  country. Bus passengers in the District who have SmarTrip cards pay  $1.25 for a bus ride, while Chicagoans, San Franciscans, New Yorkers  and Seattleites pay $2 or more in their cities. 
  This is no way to run a railway or a bus system, as even Mr. Graham acknowledges implicitly. He has consented to a 25-cent increase in bus fares in the fiscal year starting in July. That's a step in the right direction -- although it's not enough to bring Metrobus in line with other major transit networks. 
The deeper problem remains Metro's balkanized governance, and  specifically a board of directors that pits suburban representatives  from Virginia against state representatives from Maryland against city  representatives from the District -- and allows each a veto. Of course,  Metro cannot climb out of its budgetary hole exclusively on the backs  of bus riders. But it is also unlikely to solve its long-term money and  safety problems without overhauling an antiquated governing structure  that was better suited to building a transit system than running one. 

My take on it is this:  I fully agree with the notion that Jim Graham is hurting WMATA as an entire organization in his stalwart defense of the bus riders who are his constituents.  The current 1.25 fare is a huge bargain when compared to other cities, the rate at which fares have increased historicaly, and Metro's current financial plight.  I thought it was a huge mistake when Metro didn't raise fares for 8 years (and even decreased them in some instances over that span) in the 1990s.  I thought the recent fare increases haven't been significant enough (a nickel here and a dime there, usually to please Jim Graham, don't add up today to much of anything).  But considering that the bus lines seem to have been almost unaltered since WMATA's takeover, with tons of redundancy, confusing route designations and variations, and a lack of true limited and express services that most modern bus systems now have, the bus network should be revamped to meet today's needs, not the needs of the 1970s and 1980s.  The fare ought to reflect the realities, financial and otherwise, of the current times, and not the past, which means it needs to go up.

With regards to the editorial taking issue with the Metro board structure, I don't think the system of representatives from each of the three jurisdictions (and now the federal government) is problematic in and of itself.  However, I do think that the current board members are generally unqualified to serve on the board.  They are looking out for their own constituencies, which is to be expected, but they have no regional outlook and generally no transportation management experience, and it shows in the way they make decisions.  Should there be some politicians on this board?  Probably, since at the end of the day, WMATA needs money from the various jurisdictions to be able to operate.  But getting some people with transportation experience or who can see beyond politics to have a regional outlook would help, too.

[rideonrulez]

Oren, Well said!! I do see Jim Graham's side of the argument about the lower income ride the bus in most cases. But honestly the bus fare has been way too low for too long. But maybe it has to do with the high cost of living in the DC area? I'm saying this because cities like Chicago that have a lower cost of living pay $2.25 to ride the bus.

[Scrabbleship]

Oren, Well said!! I do see Jim Graham's side of the argument about the lower income ride the bus in most cases. But honestly the bus fare has been way too low for too long. But maybe it has to do with the high cost of living in the DC area? I'm saying this because cities like Chicago that have a lower cost of living pay $2.25 to ride the bus.

This is what I've always thought. With DC's cost of living so high, the cost of transit (bus wise and short rail trip wise) is a thrown bone towards those people who are paying a lot otherwise. Similar case exists in Boston where the MBTA's passes are obscenely low ($15 for a weekly pass, $59 for a monthly). Then again, Chicago does have passes and they save out in the end versus DC.

I would say hike the bus fares and reform rail fares (it's going to have to happen once the Silver Line comes into play, the current max cap at 10+ miles off-peak/15+ miles peak might be a bit too low). And maybe hire some CTA/MBTA people to fix the mess at Metro.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Oren, Well said!! I do see Jim Graham's side of the argument about the lower income ride the bus in most cases. But honestly the bus fare has been way too low for too long. But maybe it has to do with the high cost of living in the DC area? I'm saying this because cities like Chicago that have a lower cost of living pay $2.25 to ride the bus.

This is what I've always thought. With DC's cost of living so high, the cost of transit (bus wise and short rail trip wise) is a thrown bone towards those people who are paying a lot otherwise. Similar case exists in Boston where the MBTA's passes are obscenely low ($15 for a weekly pass, $59 for a monthly). Then again, Chicago does have passes and they save out in the end versus DC.

I would say hike the bus fares and reform rail fares (it's going to have to happen once the Silver Line comes into play, the current max cap at 10+ miles off-peak/15+ miles peak might be a bit too low). And maybe hire some CTA/MBTA people to fix the mess at Metro.

Care to explain your obsession with the MBTA? 

[Scrabbleship]

Oren, Well said!! I do see Jim Graham's side of the argument about the lower income ride the bus in most cases. But honestly the bus fare has been way too low for too long. But maybe it has to do with the high cost of living in the DC area? I'm saying this because cities like Chicago that have a lower cost of living pay $2.25 to ride the bus.

This is what I've always thought. With DC's cost of living so high, the cost of transit (bus wise and short rail trip wise) is a thrown bone towards those people who are paying a lot otherwise. Similar case exists in Boston where the MBTA's passes are obscenely low ($15 for a weekly pass, $59 for a monthly). Then again, Chicago does have passes and they save out in the end versus DC.

I would say hike the bus fares and reform rail fares (it's going to have to happen once the Silver Line comes into play, the current max cap at 10+ miles off-peak/15+ miles peak might be a bit too low). And maybe hire some CTA/MBTA people to fix the mess at Metro.

Care to explain your obsession with the MBTA? 

1: They've kind of made it out of a period where deferred maintenance was taking its toll on them in the 90's-early 2000's. Of course, theirs was truly deferred, Metro spend nothing on preventative maintenance.

2: Boston doesn't have a Jim Graham keeping their fares artificially low and the poor people there "suffer" with bus fares of $1.25 CharlieCard/$1.50 cash-ticket with no subsidies for poor areas and rail fares of $1.70 CharlieCard/$2.00 cash-ticket.

3: True monthly/weekly passes that are CHEAP!! $15 weekly/$59 monthly. Right now, the combo of a 7-day all rides Metrorail pass + a weekly Metrobus pass is $52 and change. Something there isn't right.

4: Unlike MARC and VRE, the MBCR arm of MBTA at least cajoled weekend service spots from Amtrak and CSX and didn't backtrack when the going got tough.

5: Buses on key bus routes on the MBTA come at shorter headways than their Metrobus counterparts.

I know the MBTA has its faults. They gypped Washington Street of a true Orange Line replacement (not that the El should've been demolished). The E between Heath Street and Forest Hills (and, going back, the A to Watertown) shouldn't have been cut. The B branch near Boston College makes the Red Line at rush hour seem sane. They still seem to be going in a better direction than the assorted transit of the DC area which is about to explode.

[WayneNYC]

I always thought Metrobus fares were far too low also.  I can side with Graham only to a certain (small) extent.  I think fare hikes and so on need to be spread somewhat more evenly.  I think WMATA needs to do more like transit agencies in other major cities.  I'm not at all insensitive to low income people in the inner city, especially since that how I grew up.  However, I'm against keeping the bus fare barely above $1, yet a one-way Metrorail fare can cost up to $4.60!!!  I'll say it again... As much as I'm pro-transit, there's no way I'd get out of my car now in favor of Metrorail.  If I did, it would cost me a whopping $180 per month in Metrorail fares. 

[79MetroExtraMD]

I think either way driving or taking transit, people are both somewhat screwed. If you live around the Baltimore area, insurance premiums are high because of the fact that we were named the most dangerous city for drivers where people who filed a claim had at least 1 prior accident. Now only that, the increases in so many vehicle services (title, tag, DL fees, etc). On the transit side, it's been mainly a political circus where things are really wacky. I'm pro-transit myself but you have alot of politicians whove never set foot on a Metrobus or MTA bus and really found out how things are not as effective as they should be. The funding for various agencies have suffered from alot of reasons. I remember a couple times where alot of cities were putting at least half of their system on the chopping block as scare tactics to get emergency funding. It's a very risky idea because it affects your patronage and ridership for those who depend on public transportation. What this area needs is something California had passed recently: Measure R http://www.metro.net/projects/measurer/. If people really do care about getting to and from work much more effeciently, at least try to sway State and Federal legislatures to think like them since they are the backbone of the government.

@Scrabbleship
Weekend service on MARC between Baltimore and Washington will not likely happen anytime soon or even in the next few years because Baltimore is a major freight hub. CSX has 4 yards (Locust Point, Bayview, Penn Mary, Curtis Bay) and a chokepoint of the Howard Street tunnel. There is a bulk of freight traffic on the weekends and most of the traffic traveling through or originating in Baltimore heads towards the South along the busiest CSX lines. Also, CSX is trying to get out of the commuter rail business because they just don't want to run Camden and Brunswick anymore. As for Amtrak, running MARC trains compromises other Amtrak train schedules and also with recent trackwork underway, would make it next to impossible to run a fairly smooth system on the weekend. MARC commuters who have monthly and weekly tickets can take select Regional trains (since the bulk of commuters have monthly and weekly tickets). In addition, I doubt the federal government would have weekend business occuring in addition to the weekday business (just too costly).

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Metrobus fares have gone up a full 35 cents (25 cents if you pay with Smartrip) since the 1995 fare increase.  That is a steal.

Jason, your reasons for your MBTA obsession aren't persuading me.  WMATA has had rough times and has generally been able to pull out of them.  OK, this one is more serious, but it is ridiculous IMO to catastrophize about WMATA's current situation when other systems have managed turnarounds.

The MBTA fares are not as simple as you make them out to be.  Ever ride to Riverside or Braintree?  In the pre CharlieCard days (I haven't been on the MBTA since 2005), you needed 2.50 in coins to board an inbound green line at some stations.

I highly doubt the MBTA bus headways are significantly different than WMATA's.  Maybe they remain on schedule better in Boston, but is all the traffic in DC WMATA's fault?

I can't imagine MARC has a high demand for weekend service.  MDOT would do just as well by heavily subsidizing AMTK fares such that they were comprable to MARC fares for purchases between Baltimore, BWI, and Washington at times when MARC doesn't run.

What is your obsession with monthly and weekly passes?  It is difficult to offer fair pass discounts on a distance based fare system like WMATA's.  BART makes no attempt, saying the different fares for each rider make passes next to impossible. 

[Tritransit Area]

What is your obsession with monthly and weekly passes?  It is difficult to offer fair pass discounts on a distance based fare system like WMATA's.  BART makes no attempt, saying the different fares for each rider make passes next to impossible.

If they tried breaking things down into "zones", it may work.  Go further than what your pass allows, then you have to pay the exit fare.

Does Smartrip offer ANY discounts on Metrorail?

[Tritransit Area]

Out of curiosity, with WMATA's bus fare structure (3 hours unlimited transfers and Smartrip discount), what do you guys believe would be a fair price to pay for a Metrobus ride, not considering operational cost and all those technical financial things?  I still find $2 to be an outrageous base fare.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

No discount for using Smartrip on Metrorail as of now.  That may change with the new fare structure.

I take issue with the idea of a zone system, unless you want to only have zones apply for passes.  If the zones only apply to passes, then that is a great idea and imagine you could develop concentric zones around the center of town to create fair fares (travel from an outlying zone to another outlying zone might be harder to price).  However, if you are proposing zones for all fares, I don't think that would work so well because the mileage based system means you pay for how far you actually go.  However, if someone wants to ride just from one station to the next one or the one after and then crosses a fare zone, they get walloped while someone traveling further might pay less.

To answer your second question, I'd say the fair price for a Metrobus ride is $1.10 plus adjustments from changes in inflation and the cost of living from 1995 until the present time.  The $1.10 for a ride was in line, from my best recollection, with other TAs at that time.  WMATA is now dirt cheap compared to most major systems.  I agree $2 or more is probably too much, but the fare probably should be at least $1.50 now, and a fare of about $1.75 after the next round of increases wouldn't be too unreasonable in my mind. 

The three hour transfer window was a joke and I hope it is eliminated.  There is a lot of revenue being lost with that, especially since it seems each tap starts a new 3 hour window.  Great for busfanning but horrible for the piggybank.

NOTE: The numbers I list above are cash fares, not Smartrip fares.  I'm all for small Smartrip discounts though.

[Scrabbleship]

Oren, Oren Oren...

I think that WMATA in its current state is a unsustainable organization. When was the last time anyone has said anything positive about WMATA? Ever since Catoe began to now it's just been all doom and gloom and frankly the rail end has taken too much of the abuse in terms of higher fares and always being singled out for hikes and all. The fear of taking on the Bowtied One-Man BRU makes matters worse because frankly the bus fare could stand to be higher and the precious poor people would survive just like the poor people in Baltimore. Or New York. Or Philadelphia. Or parts of Boston. Or Chicago. And so forth. It could easily be hiked to $2 and people will survive.

As for weekend commuter rail, I think that if it existed it'd be a bigger hit than anyone here realizes. I hear all the time from people on the fringes (a sample ranging from Frederick to Stafford to Odenton) wishing that MARC/VRE ran weekends and would gladly pay any premiums vs driving to Metro and riding Metro in. Don't even get started on people in Baltimore wanting to go to DC/in DC wanting to go to Baltimore or BWI. At the same time, weekend commuter rail service would benefit places on the fringe such as Frederick, Harpers Ferry, Fredericksburg, Manassas, and more that would get day trippers from DC. The 9-to-5 mindset of this area is a bit depressing.

I seriously think that the Metro fare system has gotten way out of hand and they should've never done distance-based pricing. Look at how nobody else has adopted it in recent years and many (such as Baltimore or the aborted MBTA plans) have backed away from it. Flat-fare it at, say, $2.50 off-peak, $3.00 peak and things will work just fine.

Fixed fare zones regardless of location are a bad idea, I cite CalTrain as exhibit A and PAT as Exhibit B (especially with some of those routes that weave fare zones). I think that if Metro were to utilize them, it'd make sense to use the current distance metrics to begin the zones at outlying stations (Zone 1 being under 6 miles, Zone 2 6-12 miles, Zone 3 12+ miles, then introduce a Zone 4 once the Silver Line starts). Maps and charts at every station will keep it somewhat simple. My dream setup would be something like this.

Zone 1/Base: $2.00
Zone 2: $2.50
Zone 3: $3.00
Peak Hours: $.50 surcharge

The current proposed hikes will devastate Metro and will become crippling and make other major cities seem relatively placid in terms of fares.

[WMATAGMOAGH]

Your idea of weekend travelers on MARC being able to get to places such as Frederick and Harpers Ferry is impractical IMHO.  No trains are stored overnight in Washington, so they wouldn't be able to run out there on any sort of convenient schedule.  Also, the train isn't competitive to a car in terms of travel time on the weekend to places like those.  Same issue with the storage for VRE trains, but travel times might be more competitive with cars since NOVA weekend traffic can still be pretty bad.  I think it is fair to say that most people living out there who ride MARC have access to cars and therefore can drive in to the nearest Metro station with a parking lot and get into DC that way.  I just don't see the demand or need for that sort of service in these financial times.

How exactly is the distance based fare system "out of hand"?  How come it hasn't been considered that way for the past 33 years, since it was instituted in 1977?  The proposal of flat fares for WMATA was last seriously considered back when Richard Page was general manager.  It didn't get instituted then, and it certainly won't get instituted now.  It is inherintly unfair to people living in the center of the city, as they will pay significantly more for their shorter trips, while riders coming in from Franconia-Springfield and Shady Grove will be bankrobbers, paying low fares to travel long distances across jurisdictional lines.  Read Dr. Gridlock's post on the matter today and you'll get a sense as to why flat fares can't work in DC.  I'd be interested in knowing why Boston ended its distance based pricing scheme because it made sense, the branches going furthest away from the city (Riverside and Braintree) paid the most.  The Baltimore Metro line doesn't go nearly as far from downtown as Metrorail lines in DC do (and those fares are probably lower than it should be, since Baltimore gets more transit funding from Annapolis than the DC area does by a number of metrics).  Seeing as no subway that I know of in the United States has a flat fare starting at $2.50 at any time of day, why should WMATA?  You seriously want to charge someone $3 to ride from Woodley Park to Judiciary Square during rush hour, as an example of a relatively short ride, yet someone coming from Shady Grove would pay the same?

(Fun fact of the day: WMATA did have a flat fare for its first 15 months of operation, 40 cents off peak, 55 cents peak, collected in bus fareboxes, since the AFC equipment didn't come on line until July 1, 1977.)

You say the proposed fare increases will devastate Metro and cripple it.  I say flat fares resulting in decreased revenues or not increasing fares enough over the past 15 years will cripple it (as well as the lack of dedicated funding and the cuts in subsidies from the various jurisdictions).

No one is afraid of taking on Jim Graham.  Board members argue in meetings with each other all the time.  The issue is that any one jurisdiction can practically veto an entire fare increase proposal even if the other two would go along with the proposal, and Jim Graham often uses the veto tactic to ensure that bus fares stay low.  Let's not create wild assumptions for what Metro's problems are, but instead, focus on the realities of the situations at hand.

In the transit industry, no news is good news.  Riders don't send in comment cards to Metro or write letters to the Washington Post or call WTOP when their rides are uneventful, smooth, pleasant, and on time.  They do when the trains are late, dirty, crowded, and uncomfortable.  Also, the media doesn't make much off stories about the former situations, but crave the latter.  That is why you aren't hearing any positive news about WMATA.  Are things great these days?  They certainly have been better at other times in WMATA's history.  But people have been complaining about Metro for as long as I can remember, they always find something to complain about, and will always do so, even if things turn around.

[Scrabbleship]

I'm a firm believer in the "if you build it, they will come" strategy. You really think that if weekend service on MARC/VRE existed that nobody would ride it? When did you last speak to someone who lived a distance from Metro but alongside MARC/VRE? All I hear from them about how much easier it'd be if (MARC/VRE) ran on weekends versus driving all the way up to (insert closest Metro terminal here). I think storing a couple trainsets overnight on Friday/Saturday in DC is feasible and doable.

How is it unfair for people in the center of DC to pay above what will probably be $1.60/$1.90 to ride Metro when it's just as if not more unfair for those in other cities to pay more for similar short trips? Is it inherently right for someone in New York to pay the same $2.25 to go from Grand Central to Penn Station as it is for one to go from Forest Hills to Wall Street? Same practical deal. Besides,  the $2.50 ceiling has be broken by someone already (Sacramento RT) and the $3 ceiling has already been broken up in Canada granted that Ottawa doesn't fund transit. I think all should pay their fare share and the high Metrorail fares are as unfair to those who don't get pretax transit benefits who have long commutes as keeping the Metrobus fare low is to appease the "precious poor".

Boston eliminated its extra fares for Riverside/Braintree because the trend is to have simpler fares, not more complicated fares. WMATA is the only TA that hasn't gotten this memo.

The whole "one jurisdiction can veto something" part of the WMATA compact is something that should never have been put into place? Whose grand idea was it to violate the convention of 2 against 1? My take is someone has to take Graham on and say that the low fare party for the poor people is over. In reality, WMATA should be dismantled, replaced with something more fare and modern which starting from scratch could be born non-union. Of course, nobody has the daring to do that.

Personal rant: I don't get a pre-tax benefit and work for a company that is in limbo (former CEO defrauded the government and is indicted, but he's stalling a sale). Where I work (White Flint), live (Silver Spring), have friends/social commitments (DC), and a significant other (North Arlington) are four  totally dissimilar places. This fare increase is going to hit me a lot as it's going to mean a lot $5 fares for me if I go from work to the latter two. Seeing people in Boston, NYC, and Philly get a lot more for far less makes me wonder why DC can't have such nice things. Metro needs to stop acting as a quasi commuter railroad and realize it isn't 1976 anymore.

[Tritransit Area]

How about passes based on miles traveled/costs of fares?  Maybe something like a pass that would be good for unlimited trips up to 3.00.  Anything more than that would result in exit fare charge.

This leads itself to abuse, yes, but how about making a card used to exit a station invalid for 18 minutes or so.   I think the technology is out there to make this possible, although this really shouldn't be WMATA's priority right now.

Interesting to hear about the outrcry against mileage based fares.  I know I've heard rumblings about doing it on at least one other agency on current subway lines, but that was shot down by stakeholders.  The thing is that with WMATArail, the service rivals commuter rail in terms of distance, especially when the Dulles Line is completed. It makes it more palatable to have the lines run with mileage based fares like a commuter rail, especially since there is a lot of suburban to city commutership.  The PATCO line from Philadelphia to Lindenwold has a similar fare structure that predates the WMATA system.  However, the fares aren't as extreme was WMATA, with a low fare of $1.25 between Philadelphia and Walter Rand Transportation Center in Camden.  Thankfully, though, they have a tollway to help subsidize the line.