Photo by technotheory.

There are two days left until the WMATA FY2010 budget hearing on Wednesday evening. Sign up to testify!

Metro has presented four options, though you can recommend combinations of the options. It’s not possible, however, to recommend any fare increase greater than those proposed, because DC’s Board members blocked that. The options mix a combination of service cuts, an across-the-board fare surcharge, and transfers from the capital budget to operating.

I plan to recommend option 4, a fare surcharge of 10¢ and $6.4 million in shifts from capital expenses to operating, with no service cuts. I’d modify this to keep the Red Line restructuring and bus stop eliminations, and reduce capital shifts by whatever those save.

Here is Metro’s chart of the options:

For reasons we’ve discussed before, Metro should not cut service. There are a few items that are okay, like the Red Line restructuring which will actually just change the schedule to match the actual performance of the line instead of putting more trains on only to get bunched up. Removing some bus stops will actually improve service for many people.

However, most of the cuts are unacceptable. Increasing late-night headways will drive choice riders away from the system. Making all trains 6 cars will ensure that busy platforms are dangerously packed at rush hour. And removing bus runs will make many workers risk running late for their jobs.

Taking money away from the capital program is always something to do with great trepidation. We need to maintain the system to prevent crises in the future. However, we’re also facing a crisis now, and have to balance the two. Metro says that with the diverted capital money, they will only delay rehabilitating a rail yard. That’s not going to bring the system down, while service cuts now could trigger a “death spiral.”

Most transit systems actually spend much more of their capital money on operations, and the systems that really ran into deferred maintenance problems spent more still. Metro needs to be careful not to get into a long-term habit of deferring maintenance, but doing that a little bit now is prudent. And jurisdictions should plan to pay back any deferrals through either cash payments in a few years or bus priority improvements that reduce long-term operating costs.

Raising fares will also drive riders away from transit, which is why it’s risky. However, it’s better than service cuts. Furthermore, 10¢ is not that much in context. Fares will be going up much more in July. The real price elasticity effects will come into effect then. If fares go up 30¢ or more later, is it really worth deferring more maintenance just to save people one-third of their longer-term costs for a mere four months?

Therefore, I recommend supporting option 4, the 10¢ increase. Ideally, we’d charge 20¢ for all trips over $2 and 10¢ for other trips, as Michael Perkins suggested, or something similar. Unfortunately, and ironically, the DC Board members’ veto of this option means that short distance riders, including most DC riders, will shoulder more of the burden than they would under a more proportional increase.

The hearing is at 5:30 pm at WMATA HQ, 600 5th St, NW. Sign up now by emailing your name, address, telephone number and organization affiliation, if any to public-hearing-testimony@wmata.com. If you can’t attend, you can also email comments to public-hearing-testimony@wmata.com via email, but we aren’t sure if Board members will receive comments before the last minute. Attending in person is definitely the best way to ensure Board members hear your opinions.

David Alpert created Greater Greater Washington in 2008 and was its executive director until 2020. He formerly worked in tech and has lived in the Boston, San Francisco Bay, and New York metro areas in addition to Washington, DC. He lives with his wife and two children in Dupont Circle.