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

Are Free and Low Cost Transfers the Key to Fixing Metro’s Operations Mess?

Without some shocking turn of events, 48% of Metro passengers (seniors and students are exempted...this time) will see a fare increase this July.  For whatever reason, last Saturday's "Special Board Meeting" held at Metro's headquarters was sparely attended.  Perhaps because the hikes were viewed as inevitable, perhaps because the hearing was on a Saturday, or maybe because the "Special Board Meeting" was widely derided as a dog and pony show; but for whatever reason there wasn't as much energy at the Metro Board room to fight a fare increase as there was to celebrate trains a couple of hundred yards away. 

Dana Gabbard reported on the event in the Comments Section for anyone wanting more details on the hearing.

Just because excitement for Metro's attempt at public outreach was low; doesn't mean there were a lack of ideas.  After proving that the Times' business writer doesn't understand what "farebox recovery ratio" means; David Lazarus went after Metro for not providing free or low cost transfers for one way trips.  While advocates often bemoan this, and other local transit agencies provide transfers, it's rare for an operations issue to get play in the mainstream media.  However, the lack of transfers means that for many passengers making one way trips, Metro's low fares aren't as low as they might appear.

In other words, if I have to take a trip that requires me to switch buses or switch modes of transit, it doubles the cost of my trip.  That my base fare is lower than a base fare in New York doesn't mean much, since the total cost of my trip is higher than that of a New Yorker who has to take multiple buses.

Apparently, Steve Hymon still reads the Times.  At The Source, he posted a poll asking people what kind of transfer system makes the most sense for Metro to look into.   Nearly three-quarters of respondents suggested some sort of "transfer" plan for single trips.

While it would certainly be a nice gesture to riders; I have to admit I'm skeptical that allowing transfers would make a big change in either ridership or Metro's budget picture.  After all, the agency is facing a $181 million deficit (or $82 million if the state comes through with the promised $99.8 million in transit operations assistance) and the fare increase is only expected to raise $24 million.  That transfers would allow the agency to attract enough new riders to close the gap, without requiring more service that would in-turn increase the deficit, is about as likely at the Utah Jazz playing in the NBA's Western Conference Finals.

Stay in touch

Sign up for our free newsletter

More from Streetsblog Los Angeles

Kevin de León’s Cynical CD14 Debate Performance Shows How Little He’s Grown

De León repeatedly accused Jurado of being a liar who lacked substantive accomplishments while taking credit for a number of projects initiated prior to his tenure.

October 16, 2024

SGV Connect 129: Looking at Measures A and G

Both ballot measures need a simple majority to pass. SGV Connect will be back after the election to review what voters decided locally, regionally and across the state.

October 16, 2024

Metro Weekday Ridership Surpasses One Million

Metro ridership is at 86 percent of pre-pandemic levels, well ahead of the nationwide average of 76 percent

October 16, 2024

This Week In Livable Streets

Metro 405 Freeway widening meeting, weekend Metro A Line closures (Duarte to Azusa), Metro Rail to Rail path construction, and more

October 15, 2024
See all posts