|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 20, 2010 22:22:03 GMT -8
On 19 May 2010, the Metro Board of Directors approved the following fare increases (effective 1 July 2010): - Single fare: $1.50 (from $1.25)
- Daily pass: $6.00 (from $5.00)
- Weekly pass: $20.00 (from $17.00)
- Monthly pass: $75.00 (from $62.00)
Fares for seniors, students, the disabled and Medicare recipients will not increase. These riders comprise 52% of Metro's total ridership. Thus, the majority of riders will not be affected by the fare increase. With this fare increase, fares will still pay only 28% of the cost of transit operations: the rest will continue to be subsidized. The increased fares will continue to be among the lowest in the U.S. |
|
|
|
Post by ieko on May 20, 2010 22:27:20 GMT -8
What about the EZ Pass?
|
|
|
|
Post by rayinla on May 20, 2010 23:23:12 GMT -8
With this fare increase, fares will still pay only 28% of the cost of transit operations: the rest will continue to be subsidized. The increased fares will continue to be among the lowest in the U.S. Personally, I think state law should require, at a minimum, a 40% farebox recovery rate (I think this works out to a little over $2.00 per trip). Metro needs to be run like a business not a charity. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 21, 2010 9:03:44 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by jeisenbe on May 22, 2010 7:31:50 GMT -8
Personally, I think state law should require, at a minimum, a 40% farebox recovery rate (I think this works out to a little over $2.00 per trip). Metro needs to be run like a business not a charity. There are three ways to do this: raise fares by 100%, cut service, or do both. If this is a system-wide averages, some lines (Blue Line, Red Line) will end up with near 100% farebox recovery, subsidizing suburban bus routes. On the other hand, if you demand every route have a 40% recovery ration, rail fares would be lower (per distance...) and many suburban routes would need to be cut due to "low" ridership. But then large areas of the county will be inaccessible by bus. Transit is not a charity, but it is a public good. We don't cut telephone and electrical service to rural areas just because it is unprofitable to run new lines out to the mountains, and we should not eliminate transit to low-density areas, when there will be people living there who need it. That's why dial-a-ride services are heavily subsidized for the disabled, even though the farebox recovery is less thlan 10%. I would agree with setting a standard 50% farebox recovery ratio for urban lines if there were some way of guaranteeing the other 50% from the state when ridership increases, and if there was a separate subsidy for "coverage" routes in the suburbs, which are politically and socially necessary. The subsidized fares for students, disabled, elderly etc should also be government funded. Otherwise, fares will have to increase every time ridership rises, to maintain operations. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 27, 2010 13:32:40 GMT -8
From The Source: The agency’s Board of Directors began their regular monthly meeting this morning but Board Chairman Ara Najarian called for a recess after several minutes of often angry public testimony from members of the Bus Rider Union (BRU).
The BRU has several dozen members at the meeting. They are calling for the Board of Directors to rescind the fare increase scheduled for July 1, although no vote has been scheduled. The increase was originally approved in 2007 and then was delayed from July 1 of 2009 to this July 1 as part of the Measure R sales tax increase.
Here’s the new fare structure. As we’ve written on several occasions, even with the increase Metro fares are in line with the fares of other major transit agencies in the nation. It is also worth noting that fares for students, the disabled, seniors and Medicare recipients remain frozen — another provision of Measure R — until July 1, 2013. Only 48% of Metro users will pay a higher fare beginning in July.
In addition, Metro also has a separate set of low fares for qualifying low-income transit users. And here is the update: UPDATE: The meeting resumed, but interruptions from the BRU continue, with members demanding a hearing on the fare increase, despite the fact no hearing had been publicly scheduled, nor has the Board of Directors indicated they were going to rescind the fare increase, originally approved |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on May 27, 2010 17:04:36 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Jun 1, 2010 10:38:45 GMT -8
Anybody know if those hunger strikers are still on strike?
I may not be poor now but I grew up pretty poor. Even back then, 25 cents was not very much money. Nowadays it's hardly worth anything. You can't even buy a postage stamp or a candy bar for 25 cents any more.
So is a fare increase of $.25 per ride really the impossible burden on people that it's being made out to be? And if so, how do poor people who need to drive manage to get by, when the price of gasoline unpredictably fluctuates over much larger ranges?
|
|
|
|
Post by spokker on Jun 1, 2010 21:04:26 GMT -8
Poverty is definitely a problem. I believe the US is entering a structural change in which new generations will be less successful financially than their parents, a development intentionally designed by corporate interests no less!
The solution to this, if anything, does not lie in starving the bus system of badly needed funds. I don't know where that mindset comes from.
|
|
