Report a Comment

That is exactly why POP pricing worked. You have to remember that the primary purpose of POP pricing was to raise more money for Metro to avoid service cuts. Since federal workers with their subsidies are price insensitive, POP has worked brilliantly to raise more money while still running trains at full capacity.

So if we're to use Staley's reasoning, should we impose congestion pricing on car commuters too?

That's exactly what Staley implied by citing California's toll roads as an example for Metro to emulate.

Peak of the peak pricing was a part of last year's fare increase, adding a 20¢ surcharge for trips in the busiest 1½ hour in the morning and evening. It's proven fairly unpopular,

Well, of course, POP pricing is unpopular just like any fare increase or service cut would be unpopular. The fairer comparison would be asking people whether they would rather raise all fares a little or institute POP pricing. That's pretty much what Metro did last year in their public input process and people chose POP.

Staley also suggests a "value capture" mechanism for WMATA to keep some of the tax revenue that comes from greater development around Metro stations.

I'm interested to see tomorrow's analysis of this idea which I think is a good one. Special tax districts have successfully built (or will build) the New York Ave and Potomac Yard metro stations and you could consider the Silver Line financed similarly since it's majority financed by increased DTR tolls. Seems like the idea is working.

by Falls Church on Jun 27, 2011 11:58 am • link • report