25-cent fare hike?
At the first public hearing Thursday on the CTA budget, the CTA board asked staff (reg. req.) to go back and look at how a 25-cent fare increase might reduce the need for service cuts.
Personally, I'd pay a quarter more to keep bus lines open and overnight service on the Red and Blue lines. Remember, before last year, the basic fare hadn't been increased for 12 years. New York and Philly riders pay two bucks.
A Tribune editorial also has an intriguing idea for a new way to charge for rides:
"The CTA needs a system that can charge riders according to how far they travel, as the Metra commuter rail does. A ride from O'Hare to the Loop should cost more than a ride downtown from the Near North Side. The CTA should charge more for rush-hour rides than it does for other times, so it captures higher fares from those who can afford them--those who are working--and gives a break to those who have the option to travel at earlier or later times."
Some commenters here have pushed for higher rush hour fares. What do you think?
Not sure that a rush hour hike wouldn't negatively impact the working poor, but I personally would consider anything up to $2.50/trip to be reasonable. $5 a day to get to work? I can hack that.
I don't like the fare-per-mile/-zone concept very much, as the working poor tend to live on the further reaches of some lines (certainly the Brown and the Red) but work in the downtown area.
Posted by: Steve | October 15, 2004 at 12:25 PM
hey, why not go back to the classic fare module: pay $2.00 rush hours and trains, and pay $1.75 on other times. ALL express buses are subject to the reinstatement of the surcharge of a quarter.
Posted by: Dave | October 15, 2004 at 06:11 PM
i could definitely handle a $.25 hike, as long as transfers were free.
using a fare system like metra would be a terrible idea, though. first of all, some people are barely smart enough to use the current cta cards as it is. (just check out the addison red line stop after a cubs game and you'll see what i mean.) secondly, it's more of a hassle and inconvenience to riders (even regulars). and finally, they would have to hire more employees to be ticket agents and conductors (which is why metra is so much more expensive).
Posted by: jetgirl | October 16, 2004 at 12:38 PM
Jetgirl -- I don't think they'd have to hire anyone, except some IT people. They'd also need to install exit turnstiles.
At least, that's how it worked on DC's system back when I used it a decade ago -- you put your card in at both stations, and it charges you at your destination station based on the distance travelled.
San Diego has the funniest system -- payment is basically optional. There are supposed to be spot checks or something, with heavy fines if you're on their light rail without a fare card, but I used it for four days on vacation once without getting checked. But we weren't using it on rush hour.
Posted by: Steve | October 16, 2004 at 04:23 PM
Another quarter a ride isn't going to hurt me much either, but that's hardly the point. CTA riders come in two types-- those who could afford a car if they wanted to and those who have no other choice but to ride the CTA. A fare increase is a large burden to the latter. But popular public transportation is an important part of good environmental and land use policy in the city. When fares go up, some people choose to drive, which creates more pollution and pressure on parking spaces.
From a political perspective, the mayor's embrace of another increase was ill-timed. Now the legislature can afford to avoid making some hard choices this year-- specifically finding more money for the CTA. Other cities like Houston and Dallas are now spending more tax money per capita for their public transportation system than we are and that's outrageous. The city needs to put some money on the table for the CTA.
Posted by: James Withrow | October 18, 2004 at 07:19 PM
A few comments. The end of the Brown line is where the current governor lives, and Lincoln Square is hardly the oasis for the working poor. Just an observation.
Second, Houston is BUILDING a rapid transit system. That costs more per capita than maintaining one. Not sure about Dallas, but Houston is out-of-pocket for their light rail.
Finally, parking in my building is $18 a day, and we are very cheap. Parking at the new garages is (I think) $16 per day. Those are on the eastern fringes of the Loop. On LaSalle Street, for instance, parking is much more expensive. I do not believe that fare increases on the CTA cause people to decide to take on the burden of $100/week for parking.
Posted by: David | October 19, 2004 at 09:49 AM
David -- who do you suppose is doing better off financially, the people who board the Brown Line south of Belmont, or those who board north of it?
If one governor can singlehandedly raise the economic prospects of a six-stop stretch of the CTA, then let the miracle commence!
Posted by: Steve | October 19, 2004 at 04:16 PM
I'm all for a fare hike for rush hour riders, but charging fares based on distance would really hurt my pockets. Sometimes I have to take Pace (to avoid Metra's high fares) from Holbrook/Dixie (Flossmoor) and transfer to CTA at 79th and Western to take the X49/49 bus north to Belmont. Now, if that trip was distance based, im sure it would be over the $5 dollar mark because it is about 20-30 miles long. What the CTA needs to do is use what they have more effectively like putting articulated buses where they are really needed and holding bus drivers more accountable for late runs..
Posted by: Thomas | October 19, 2004 at 10:25 PM