Political Realities Stalled Fare Hike

Resistance Offers New Metro Chief Lesson on Board

Before publicly divulging his plan to raise fares, Metro General Manager John B. Catoe Jr. met for well over an hour with each of the agency's 12 board members to sketch the outlines of his much-anticipated plan. He didn't want them to be surprised when he made his pitch in public.

But it was Catoe who was taken aback when he laid out his plan. Instead of making the proposal the starting point of discussions, as Catoe anticipated, board members took the drastic step of halting the dialogue altogether. Board members said they would consider higher fares only after Catoe returned with more justification for why they were needed and with a long-term policy for how fares should be set -- issues that Catoe expected to be hashed out as part of discussions.

With their actions, board members sent a message about Metro politics: Don't put us on the spot with something so charged -- raising rush-hour subway fares by 45 cents and bus rides a quarter -- and expect us to approve it without a substantial public vetting.

As T. Dana Kauffman, a Fairfax County supervisor who represents Virginia on the Metro board, put it: "You can't present hard numbers at 9:20 and expect agreement by 9:30."

For Catoe, a District son who returned eight months ago to take Metro's top job, it was a harsh introduction to the unique politics of the agency's governing board. The 12 officials hail from not one but three jurisdictions, and they bring with them very different priorities. Board members are appointed by elected officials or elected in their home jurisdictions, so their political realities often come into play.

"It was naive of me to hope they would agree to set a date for public hearings with the information we provided," Catoe said. "We didn't give them the level of details we should have given them."

What Catoe did give them were fare numbers -- the first time board members had seen the figures -- without specifics about the agency's projected $173 million shortfall. He also laid out a daunting timetable that left little time for board members to have their say.

"It was too much to get the board to do at one meeting," Catoe said. "I took them out of sequence. It dawned on me: Duh."

Since Catoe's proposal Sept. 13, he has spoken with several board members, and the agency's finance staff has reworked expense and revenue forecasts. A scaled-down fare increase will be presented to the board Thursday, he said, along with detailed cost and revenue projections that show a smaller shortfall of $141 million.

Catoe has said the Metro board needs to move quickly so a fare hike can take effect in January.

But current and former board members said politics almost always complicates and delays decisions. The issue is always equity: How should Metro's costs be divided among riders and local governments, between suburbanites and city dwellers? Officials tend to fracture along geographic lines that pit the District against its suburban neighbors.

"You've got multiple jurisdictions, and when you're talking about a fare increase, it's more an exercise in modern dance than a display of direct action," Kauffman said.