Metro riders — especially those with disabilities — are trying one last time to stop Metro’s board from approving fare increases.
A board committee gave preliminary approval two weeks ago to raise fares on buses and trains, bump up parking fees and add hefty surcharges for riders without SmarTrip farecards. The full board is expected to approve the increases Thursday.
But disabled riders argue that the board is going against its own fare standards, hurting low-income disabled riders and undermining its own business with the increases, while getting rid of needed revenue by scrapping the 20-cent “peak-of-the-peak” rail surcharge.
“How is it financially feasible to forego $16 million in revenue from rail fares but not financially feasible to adjust MetroAccess fares projected to only produce a total of $8 million in revenue?” Accessibility Advisory Committee Chairman Patrick Sheehan wrote to Metro’s chairwoman.
The committee gave the board a report Monday on why the increases are flawed. A dozen disabled riders plan to urge the board Thursday to reconsider, said MetroAccess rider Pat Spray.
“From a business perspective, what they are doing is cutting off their nose to spite their face,” he said.
Metro is not planning to raise MetroAccess fares directly, and the agency seeks to keep the maximum fare at $7 on the federally mandated service. But by raising bus and rail fares, MetroAccess fares would rise because they cost double a comparable bus or train trip.
Disabled riders argued that double fares were burdensome when Metro enacted them in 2011. Now they will be higher.
About one-fourth of riders pay the maximum fare, but the committee projects about half would be paying the maximum after the hike — if they don’t abandon MetroAccess because it’s too expensive.
MetroAccess ridership has been dropping, a reversal after growing as much as 20 percent annually. But costs have not fallen.
“Reducing ridership has had an adverse effect on efficiency,” the AAC report says. “The more riders you remove from the pool of possible shared trips, the lower the maximum possible efficiency becomes.”
