| Page 2 of 2 < |
Metro Board Weighing a Scaled-Down Fare Hike
|
TOOLBOX
   Resize
COMMENT
 Discussion Policy
 CLOSE
Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
Who's Blogging  |
The Riders' Advisory Council, which is appointed by Metro, called "the proposal of a mid-fiscal year fare increase disquieting," according to a statement by Chairman I. Michael Snyder. Although many riders recognize the need for a fare increase, he said, higher rates should be pegged to increases in wages, and indexed fare hikes should be tied to a performance indicator or customer-service measure, he said.
"If Metro's services are meeting expectations, riders would be more receptive to a modest fare increase," he said.
Jack Corbett of MetroRiders.org criticized Metro's request for a fare increase in the current fiscal year when the anticipated shortfall isn't likely to materialize until the next year.
"That's like a landlord asking a tenant voluntarily to increase her rental payments starting at mid-year so the rent to the next tenant won't have to be set so high!" he wrote in a letter this week to Metro Chairman Elizabeth "Betty" Hewlett.
Corbett also pointed out that Metro's estimates of needed revenue keep changing and questioned whether the latest numbers are accurate.
In December, agency officials asked for a controversial fare increase to fill a projected budget gap for this year. But shortly after Catoe became the general manager in January, he shelved the proposal and said no increase would be needed. Instead, the agency cut 254 positions, about 20 percent of its administrative staff, and reduced other costs.
Transit agency officials say expenses have soared in recent years as the system has set ridership records. The extra money at the farebox has not offset growing expenses, including an 80 percent increase in health insurance costs, a fuel cost increase of more than 300 percent since 1995 and maintenance needs for the 31-year-old system.
Catoe has said the fare increases, which would be the first in four years, are needed to offset the shortfall and to pay for boosts in service, such as running more buses and eight-car trains to improve reliability and reduce crowding.
If Metro provides a minimal level of additional service in the next fiscal year, expenses will grow by $20 million more. This additional service would include the costs of operating the new rail cars, extending Yellow Line service to Fort Totten during off-peak hours and the cost of ending the Red Line turn-back at Grosvenor-Strathmore during off-peak periods.
