Metro advances increase in fares

Metro’s budget committee yesterday approved a fare increase of up to 15 cents, which could go into effect as early as June if approved by the transit system’s full board.

Metrorail fares will go from $1.20 to $1.35, and bus fares would increase from $1.20 to $1.25, pending a vote from the full Metro board next month. .

The increase would apply to peak and off-peak base subway fares, with the highest rush-hour trip costing $3.90. The daily parking fee at Metro lots — which was pegged to rise $1 — will increase by 75 cents, and the monthly reserved parking cost would go from $35 to $45.

The rate increases in the District, the second in as many years, come on the heels of a highly publicized scandal in which Metro reported losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars in cash receipts from its parking lots and garages. An internal audit accused cashiers employed by parking contractor Penn Parking of stealing $500,000 to $1 million a year from cash payments made at parking lots and garages.

Metro officials said the increases will generate $28.9 million to close a budget gap of $23.4 million for fiscal 2005.

The budget committee passed the proposal at yesterday’s weekly Metro board meeting with a strong majority vote. If approved by the board on June 17, the increase would go into effect shortly thereafter.

The committee also agreed to hold public hearings on charging peak fares from 2 a.m. to 3 a.m. on weekends and charging MetroAccess users up to $4 for travel beyond three-quarters of a mile from rail stations or fixed bus routes.

Despite the committee’s approval of the increases, some members said they had reservations about the plan.

“I would have liked to have seen the $1 increase in parking fees.” Board Vice Chairman Gladys W. Mack said. “The market would be able to bear it. [But] given the fact that we do have to balance the budget, I think this is a [fair] compromise.”

Chris Zimmerman, a board member who represents Arlington County, said if rates are increased, it should be reflected in the quality of service.

“Contrary to [media reports], some people are behind rate increases. But they say ’I’ll pay more, but I want to get more.’”

One improvement Mr. Zimmerman suggested would be to improve the audio systems in train stations.

“When important announcements are made, people [will] have some idea what the heck they’re being told.”

Earlier drafts of the proposal raised the bus rate 15 cents. Board member and D.C. Council member Jim Graham, Ward 1 Democrat, said bus riders — many of whom depend upon Metrobus as the sole means of transportation and cannot afford an alternative — have been unfairly saddled with bridging the budget shortfall.

“I appreciate the board’s work in [altering the plan] to get the increase down to 5 cents,” said Mr. Graham, who along with Mr. Zimmerman was one of only two who voted against the proposal. “But I cannot support any increase in bus fare. Twenty percent of bus riders have no cars, 40 percent are African Americans, and nearly half of them are from the District. The burden [of increasing revenue] should be placed on those most able to pay.”

The committee also decided against keeping fares steady for two years, meaning another increase likely will be considered in 2005. Officials expect another budget deficit in 2006.

The proposed base fare increase compares favorably with base transit fares in major metropolitan areas such as Chicago and Atlanta, which both have a base fare of $1.75.

Metro raised fares last June for the first time since 1995, with the base fare for rail and bus travel going from $1.10 to $1.20. Maximum rail fare increased from $3.25 to $3.60, and parking rates increased 75 cents.

The committee also approved a plan to increase the number of ads in the Metro system. The plan, which also is awaiting the full board’s approval, would put advertising in train tunnels, on buses and in subway cars.

By next spring, video monitors could be showing ads and other programs on some trains and buses. Officials expect the ads to generate about $5 million in revenue for Metro.

Mr. Graham said it was “regrettable” that Metro had to resort to considering the ads.

“We’ve got to be square about this,” he said. “This is about a need for revenue. We’re not doing this to beautify the system. We’re doing it because we need the money.”

He also warned board members to prepare for possible backlash from some of the ads. “There will be messages that are fully paid for that some people are not going to like.”