Honestly, I think they do make a pretty good case. I'd be curious to know, percentage-wise, how many riders are out in the 'burbs and how many are taking short trips in the city proper.

Depending on this answer, it would not be right to punish the majority of riders by hiking their fares while doing very little to the fares of the minority, whichever it is. Hike them both, if you must, but do it to a lesser degree. Both sorts of riders keep the system in demand, so both sorts should pay for its being supplied, not just one or the other.

On a cost per mile basis, the long-distance commuters currently pay (and will continue to pay) far less than than those who take short rides entirely within the District. On the other hand, not all of Metro's costs can properly be judged on a cost-per-mile basis. Some of the costs of running the system are fixed, some are probably best viewed as per rider and some are probably best viewed as per mile. Figuring out a "fair" allocation of those costs is tricky even disregarding the politics, etc. of the situation. Certainly, I don't feel like I have a good sense of what the breakdown of various classes of costs might be.

Separately, the comparison of rail to bus seems easier. One can pretty simply compute the percentage of rail costs paid by rail riders vs. the percentage of bus costs paid by bus riders and determine which is higher.

Finally one could (note, I say "could" not "should") view this simply as a supply-demand question. If the gov't contributions to Metro are fixed, they then know what they have to get from their riders. And different price hikes will impact ridership in different ways. One way of trying to skin the cat would be to try and make up the shortfall in a way that decreases ridership as little as possible. Don't know if they have models that would let them do this kind of pricing, but it would be one way to do it while trying to side-step politics.

I keep hearing that they should raise bus fares, but I have to think that far less people are riding buses. They come less often than trains and hold far, far less people. Would raising bus fares really make a difference.

As a bus rider, my gut feeling is also that the economic status of bus riders on the whole is much lower than metro riders. I'd hate to see fares go up ont he people who on average can afford it least.

Yes the suburban riders make a good case. Metro needs to reconsider a fare hike that will push many riders back out on the road. I live in Arlington so it is actually quicker for me to drive to work in DC. I normally ride the metro because it is less expensive than parking downtown. However if metro increases the parking fees and the transit fares by the current proposed amounts it will push me back into my car. I have been willing to put up with overcrowded trains because there was still some value in the service. Fare and fee increases would eliminate any remaining value. Also my employer does not subsidize my commute so any increases come directly out of my pocket.

I'd just like to point out that many of these long distance commuters are coming in from locations where the local government doesn't contribute to Metro's funds. For instance, Arlington Country riders pay taxes to the countty that go to paying Arlington's portion of the Metro budget. But commuters who are coming in from much farther south do not have that same tax burden to help Metro so I sort of lean toward the longest riders who park at the stations needing to pay more to offset the cost of not paying the taxes that support Metro.

I realize that not all commuters who park at the stations and ride longer distances on the Metro live in those areas that don't contribute taxes but many of them do. Short of charging customers based on where they live (and therefore whether or not their local government pays into Metro), I don't see any other way of making that part of it equitable.

I don't think the suburbanites have a particularly strong case. I'm sympathetic, but traveling longer distances should cost more than traveling shorter distances. The fact that many commuters, in Hope's view, take the MARC train should be irrelevant. It's two different systems, and not everyone who gets on at the Rockville station (or Silver Spring, for that matter) takes the MARC train. If you live that far away from where you work in or around DC, you have to factor in a high cost of commuting, just like how if you live closer to DC, you have to factor in higher rents and mortgages for housing.

I'm not sure what the demographic breakdown of bus ridership is, but I'd bet that raising fares on buses would hurt the working poor and middle class, much more than raising long-distance Metro fares would. The ideal solution would be to have the federal government subsidize Metro more, since they benefit so much from it (a pipe dream, I know).

It seems extraordinary to me that we can't just implement a flat fee system similar to the one in NYC! $2 or $3 each way and let that be that! LORD!

Here is what I dont understand: If Walmart is trying to increase their revenue, they dont raise their prices, they announce lower prices, and make up the difference in volume. I would think that if Metro lowered their fares, rather than raising them, there would be more riders on the trains and buses. [We already pay more than NY does]

...If Metro expects commuters to accept these new fare hikes and not bale out on public transportation althogether, they need to do more to convince us that it is the only way to address this problem. So far, they havent done that.

I am in favor of a flat fee for Metrorail, as well. As to buses I've always felt they need to merely optimize the runs, and remove stagnated ones to cut costs effectively and prevent large increases which hurts more people than it helps.

In addition, Metro needs to run more 8 car trains during peak hours to reduce congestion which encourages ridership. And they honestly should charge more for reserved spaces across the board (monthly permits) since they are a PREMIUM service used by a minority of riders. That should be the only exception.

-jim

I am not sure I understand - what is the benefit of having a flat fee? Why should I pay the same to go one stop as I would to go from Vienna to Shady Grove?

I find it hard to believe the statement that only Glenmont has a waiting list for reserved parking. I've requested a reserved parking space at Rockville over a year ago and have yet to hear back from Metro. Or, perhaps, it's simply their inability to get their act together and respond to requests...who knows. Having grown up in NY and lived in Chicago, it's clear that Metro fares are ridiculous.

Has it ever occurred to anyone that some of the people who commute from the 'burbs to DC are NOT among the super-rich? Yes, I work in DC, but no, I don't make as much as the per-capita average income, even in Prince George's. I accept that I chose a comparatively low-paying career, but I am really getting squeezed here.

Also: DO NOT increase the number of reserved parking spaces at the Greenbelt and College Park stations. The College Park station has hardly any permit holders as it is. If anything, the Greenbelt station needs more spaces to be designated for legal multi-day use.

I live farther out because as a single middle income wage earner I can't afford a place closer to DC. I did plan commuting costs into my housing decision/monthly budget (currently $11.80/day to park and ride from Shady Grove plus gas costs). These increases will make my daily cost rise more than an additional $2.00/day. I truly can't afford that, and will stop using the Metro and do a carpool/Marc commute. I know of a dozen or more people who will do the same. So I agree that Metro is only losing customers. How can this help raise funds?

Of course the longer distance riders don't want to pay higher fares; everybody wants to go to Heaven, but nobody wants to die. Suburban riders use more of the system, for longer increasing Metros costs, so they should pay more. And as for the canard that it will "push people back into their cars" anyone who considers their commute only in cost terms and doesn't factor in convenience and the downside riskd of driving, deserves all the hassle they'll encounter if they climb back into their cars.

Plenty of lower-income people live out in the suburbs. In Spingfield there are tons of people packed into boarding houses paying 400 or 500 a month in rent because that is all they can afford. These people are taking the metro all the way in to DC. It is unfair to take out the fare increases on lower income people who live out in Springfield, or PG County, or Wheaton, or Gaithersburg, because that is what they can afford.

Some of the budget should be balanced on the bloated, excessive payroll. When I drive past a Metro employee lot and two-thirds of the vehicles are vehicles I can only dream of affording (and I'm in the low 6-figures), something is wrong with this picture.

Several points seem to be lost in the debate.
1. Has Metro truly justified it needs the money? As a former Metro employee, I was amazed at the vast number of paper-pushing employees who have little to do. Why spend hundreds of thousands on printing new brochures just to change the color? Why have an in-house, union-labor print shop instead of turning to private sector? Does it need a weekly employee newsletter and a quarterly employee magazine - each with their own editors?
2. What has come of the efforts to put retail shops in the stations? Perhaps rent from these sites will reduce the rate hike.
3. Where is all this new advertising promised and that income stream?
4. The Post has repeatedly done stories over the last several years on the large overtime payments to rail and bus drivers. Many of these drivers drive foreign luxury autos and park for free at Metro stations. Has the labor contracts been revised to prevent this abuse and featherbeding?
Until Metro gets its house in order it should not be seeking a rate hike.
To throw gasoline on the suburban vs. urban debate: While I travel from a none member county (Anne Arundel), my state foots the bill for all Maryland counties. In Virginia, it does fall to the county to pay most of the local tab. So maybe we should have one rate for ex-urban Maryland residents and a higher rate for those ex-urban, non-paying Virgina residents!

RE: Flat fees ... why?

First, why not, according to Richard White on the WMATA Forum who said publicly:

"We could go to flat fares, but we would have to collect the same total revenues. People who take short trips would have to pay more, eventhough those who take longer trips could pay less."

Where his logic fails is that he assumes Metro is run optimally. The truth is, the NY system is well managed within a limited budget, and has been for well over a hundred years. In the case of metro, there can be improvements and optimizations to underwrite the cost of doing business. In other words, along with a flat fee comes a complete study and optimization of the system. All the money spent to do so would be saved on the back end of the project, of course, long term.

As a taxpayer I am willing to suffer the burden of underwriting a new and sensible total systemic approach to "fix" metro, which means change its infrastructure and model it after successful cities such as NY and others.

Nobody is willing to do this, stand out on the limb politically. Yet.

As to flat fees, the pro's include:

Costs are distributed equally throughout the customer base. People often forget flat fees exist in many bus systems, starting rate and incremental rates for taxi systems, parking, stadium seating and even the prime interest rate. Now within each of those systems are exceptions, sliding scale rates and special fees for special situations. So when people say flat fee, this is not to say Metro should implement discount rates for specific work related commuter routes which could be implemented on SmarTrip, for example. And this is not to say that people with disabilities are entitled to special rates and services.

It is true that the majority of riders do not fall under special circumstances and a flat fee will serve as the baseline revenue. Revenue upon which all over specialized programs and services are funded and positioned in the heirchy of rate increases over time to meet demand.

Other than special commuter fairs for specific station to station daily travel, everyone here knows even though one day you might travel a small distance, at other times you are very likely to use Metrorail for a longer ride, statistically speaking. Meaning, it all works out since all members within the system behave similarly.

We all share the burden, no one group or another has to feel the need to stand up and be heard. That sentiment has been expressed in replies here, even if warranted due to the existing system of trying to be fair to everyone and only upsetting us all.

Politicians and taxpayers need to gain control of this situation and recognize that the existing philosphy is wrong and the management system itself is broken.

Flat fees can work if implemented properly, because it HAS worked elsewhere.

-jim

I'm tired of whiny suburban commuters. You don't want a fare increase even though you live further out. You don't want more of your taxes to fund the system. You want more trains and more service even though you don't want to help foot the bill. To the people crying that there are lots of poor people in the suburbs, well there are lots of poor people in D.C., too. They're not more deserving of a fare hike than the suburban poor, especially since they travel shorter distances and help support the system through taxes. Either shut up and take your fare increase, or elect local governments that will be willing to spend tax dollars on supporting the system.

Where is the story about WMATA's public meeting in downtown DC last night? I've heard a lot about the impact of fare increases in suburban riders. Where is the perspective of District riders? Here's mine--I live a 15-minute walk from two Metro stations in upper NW DC, so I either walk or catch a bus then take the Red line for 7 stops downtown to work. Depending on the station and whether I also take the bus I can pay almost $5 a day taking Metro. A fare increase obviously impacts me too. By the way, the 30s buses that run along Wisconsin Avenue carry a lot of middle and upper-income folks going to work because parts of NW DC are far from subway stations. In addition, commuting by car between this part of town and downtown during rush hour is horrible.

Why not do a simpler tiered zone system vs. a flat rate, say $2 within DC, $3 inside the beltway, $5 outside the beltway?

I just got back from SFO, the fares on their BART are much higher, however, parking is $1 or in some cases free so I think they pay less per day overall. You can also hear coherent station announcements over their PA system.

Why not do a simpler tiered zone system vs. a flat rate, say $2 within DC, $3 inside the beltway, $5 outside the beltway?

I just got back from SFO, the fares on their BART are much higher, however, parking is $1 or in some cases free so I think they pay less per day overall. You can also hear coherent station announcements over their PA system.

Yes, suburban commuters make a very good case. I currently pay $3.65 one way from Franconia to McPherson Square plus parking. Franconia is also a stop on the VRE and there are many riders who transfer there to the system.

Long-distance riders should not be subsidizing the short-distance commuters or bus riders. If Metro wants to keep the ridership numbers up, it has to come up with a more equitable solution.

I think that Metro should not even think about raising fares until they can improve service. I take the Red Line, and I have been late for work several times over the past two weeks due to delays. Metro should be refunding us money, not raising fares.

I was around when METRO was first debated. What people forget is that the system was designed and intended for the primary purpose of getting commuters into and out of the city from the suburbs. Sure they built the DC stations first, it was the only way to build a system, but it was not intended to be primarily a DC to DC destination system, which is why the lines are designed the way they are.

I like the tiered flat rate option. I don't know if I like the prices ($5 one way for an outside-the-Beltway trip seems excessive), but the idea is a good one.

Another option outside of a tiered flat rate option would be to encourage optimization of the system while also benefiting from the booming tourism industry in our nation's capital: Offer "off-peak" fares at all times to anyone with a SmarTrip card, but charge "peak" fares to anyone still using paper fare cards during peak hours. This would help get people in and out of stations faster, reduce costs of producing farecards (you'd likely need less as people learn of this new benefit of having a SmarTrip card) and servicing as many paper farecard machines as exist now, and allow Metro to do what other sectors in the area do: make extra money off tourism (since most tourists will be using paper farecards).

Metro could promote the SmarTrip discount program (which should have existed since SmarTrip was put into place, in my opinion) by giving away free SmarTrip cards for 3 or 6 months and then lowering the cost of purchasing one to $5.

I have been hearing about a second Glenmont garage for years now. Does anybody have good information about the status of that project? I have been on the wait list for a reserved space for at least 4 years and am still over 100 spaces away at last check.

Agree with the advertising suggestion - I have no problem with seeing more ads around if it will keep the fares from going up so much. Its not like the poured concrete caves are that pretty, no problem with seeing ads put up.

One of the reasons New York's subway seems to run so well is that it has a dedicated funding setup that involves not only three states but also drivers who are taxed by the transit authority for the public transportation system. Who do Virginians think they are, not paying their fair share of the tax base for Metro? Don't point your fingers at your legislators -- you elected them! Why not step up and do the honorable thing, Virginia -- pay your share!

It's ridiculous to argue that the people who live further in the suburbs should pay more than the others b/c they are better off. Isn't one of the reason people go out further into the suburbs of Fairfax County is because they can't afford to live much closer in Arlington?

I park at Huntington metro station every day and ride to Bethesda. The costs of this trip I take are not cheaper than driving. If anything, they are about the same and take the same amount of time. The proposed rates would require me to pay more than 700 dollars a year than I currently do, which is already a burden.

Not to mention that in Huntington, it's nearly impossible to find a parking spot if you arrive after 8:30, and there's always dozens of open reserved parking spots. Increasing the number of reserved spots makes absolutely no sense.

Lastly, metro service has been getting worse and worse, with no indication that paying higher fares will improve the quality of service! I can't begin to count the number of times I've been late because of trains down, stations shut down, etc. And the solution metro always offers "shuttle busses are provided..." is a joke. During rush hour when there's thousands of commuters, how is one bus every fifteen minutes going to shuttle anybody anywhere!! Twice in as many months I've been forced to take cabs from a metro station to another metro station because of their shuttle service joke.

Raise prices? Give me a break! Get your act together first metro!!

I appreciate the concerns of the suburbanites, but as a bus-dependent DC resident, I feel we are being overlooked in this discussion. The buses are affordable, ***IF*** they come. The other day, I joined about 75 people at 6 pm at the Georgia Ave/Petworth metro stop waiting for a bus up Georgia. As at least 8 (empty) buses passed heading south, NOT ONE northbound bus was in sight. After 15 minutes or so, I decided to walk up Georgia to make my way home on foot. We don't have parking at our metro stops, and many of us don't have cars to drive to work anyways. So what are we supposed to do?! Improving service should not be contingent on raising fares. I'm really fed up with the incredibly lousy service metro provides. They've got a lot of catching up to do.

Everybody!!

If you cannot attend the next two hearings, please email:

public-hearing-testimony@wmata.com

and flood their email boxes with your views about these ridiculous fare increases!

Inaction will only lead to metro thinking everybody is okay with this!

Remember, in addition to paying more for going farther, those who use the outermost Red Line stations are also not getting full service. Only half the trains go past Grosvenor. Outside of rush hour and even in the early/late ends of rush hour, that can translate to long waits. We pay more money for less service.

Metro's fees are already outrageous: I pay close to $60/week just to park and ride from Vienna to Crystal City. How the hell am I supposed to afford anything on an entry-level salary with a hike?!! I'm only 24 and this is a huge amount of money to me. This is absolutely ridiculous. We have the highest fees in America and they still want more. I can't afford this. I won't ride Metro anymore if the rates are raised, ESPECIALLY the high fees being discussed. Congratulations, you just lost one of your prized long-distance commuters.

I'm still a big proponent of charging more to those using the paper fare cards (ie tourists) and not raising the fares of those using Smarttrip cards (ie residents). The tourists inability to understand cab zone systems is going to cost us residents more, why not charge them more to ride on our metro....

To those who want a flat fee on metro - go tell the contractor who is relaying track that the one who repairs it from rosslyn to courthouse, he is getting paid the same as the contractor who is repairing it from courthouse to vienna. One is going to get stiffed and one is going to get a bonus. You don't pay the same if you took a taxi for various distances, why would you expect the expenses for metro to be the same for different routes. The only reason NY and older subways did it with one fare was there wasn't a way to tell where someone entered the system and where they left. The DC Metro can. This way the more of the system you use (track, power to drive the train, etc) the more you pay. This isn't saying this specific fare hike is fair, but that the pricinple of the longer the ride, the more you pay is.

The already high fare costs are absolutely killing so many of us. I can't imagine having to spend even more money just to commute to work. Where will the money come from? The rising cost of gas puts enough pressure on our limited budget. We want to conserve fuel but implement a dis-incentive to ride public transportation. It doesn't make sense. No more fare increases!!!

Within the last few years the metro fare and the parking fare increased by leaps and bound. Then there is obsession with the annoying voice, plans of changing the carpets and tiles that are just fine. The fare should be evenly levied long distance traveller are already paying a lot more.
And what about the salary of six figures for bus operators? Expenditure needs to be studied carefully before raising the fares randomly.

I don't have an issue if they raise my fair rates. I believe these are necessary to the function and betterment of the transit system. I do, however, have an issue with them raising my parking rates a $1.15, for absolutely no increase in service. Parking is currently $3.50 a day at New Carrolton. With the proposed increase it will go up to $4.65 a day a full 33% increase - What are they thinking???

I live in Anne Arundel County and have no option but to drive to New Carrolton where I am forced to pay for parking. Buses to and from are few and far between, I believe there are 6 inbound/outbound for each of the rush hours to and from Crofton. Taking the bus would increase my commute time 45 minutes a day when I already spend 2 hours driving to the metro and and the metro ride itself...and I'm only going downtown. However, taking the buses may be the only option if these fair increase go through.

And increasing the number of reserved spots? Ridiculous! And, like Yellow Liner, I see a great number of those reserved spots go unused EVERY DAY, while everyone else has to treck all the way up to the 8th floor and hope for a spot.

"It's ridiculous to argue that the people who live further in the suburbs should pay more than the others b/c they are better off."

That's why the argument is that they should pay more because it costs more to travel long distances than it does to short distances.

Some people in the suburbs are paying their fair share through taxes, and others are not. The locales that don't want to spread the burden across all taxpayers should see fare increases.

The subsidy that riders receive starting from a given station should be DIRECTLY proportional to the amount of local taxes from that jurisdiction that goes to support Metro. So: Maryland pays more for Metro than Virginia? Virginia riders should pay a higher fare than Maryland riders. Arlington County ponies up more than Fairfax? Fairfax riders pay a higher fare. And since Congress won't cooperate at all, BOY will it get expensive to board at Judiciary Square or Capital Hill.

It's absurd that this system doesn't have dedicated funding from local governments. Maybe charging residents for what their local government won't pay (and stopping the cross-subsidies and freeloading across state lines) is the only way to bring this about.

All three local jurisdictions should raise a gas tax to subsidize Metro if there is a shortfall. We need more people out of their cars and into buses and subway cars. There are some do-gooders out there, but for most people, it has to make economic sense, and be worth the extra hassle, to stop driving to work and taking metro instead. Right now, it costs me more to drive and park, but it's a lot less hassle than taking a bus to a metro stop and walking 6 blocks from the station to my office. Now, if the economics were tilted more in favor of Metro, I might reconsider.

Also, I endorse the views of those who say Metro needs to get its act together. It seems like every governmental and quasi-governmental program in this area is plagued by overpaid, underutlized personnel. I suggest firing everyone and rehiring based on need and merit - a good housecleaning is needed.

First we need to see the financial statements of Metro so as to see how much waste out there. Second, this what metro needs to do: eliminate parking fees, and keep fairs as they are now. By doing so, I would bet you, you will see an exponential increase in ridership and a budget surplus not a deficit. In principle, I would rather use my car no matter how much it is going to cost me, other than submit to Metro policy of fair hikes. We should demand that Metro shows us it's financial statements so we can assess the budget gap.

The rising cost of gas puts enough pressure on our limited budget.

Don't you think that applies to the Metrobus budget as well?

Metro doesn't need to increase ridership. The reason for crowded trains and slow service is that the system hass too many riders and isn't getting enough revenue. So, up to a point, increased fares will bring in more revenue and ease crowding as the marginal riders drop off. Then Metro can add capacity. Only when revenue drops do you know you've reached the saturation point.

P.S. if you're not making a lot of money then the increased price of anything you do use is going to strain your budget. With the cost of gas and parking it would seem Metro has plenty of room to raise fares. Again, convenience and risk would seem to militate against driving.

To be fair, quality of service should be taken into account in all fare discussions, and service on Metro (especially on the Red Line) is poor. In the morning rush hour, at the end of the line, commuters often have to wait 10 or more minutes for a train. Trains are usually standing room only before they leave Shady Grove. The crowds in the evening and lack of trains going "all the way" to Shady Grove are even worse, since many terminate at Grosvenor (even trains marked for Shady Grove). Delays and miscelleous problems often double routine transit times.

Service quality does not appear to have been considered by WMATA in its current proposals. The proposals should be rescinded immediately and brought back to the drawing board to allow time for development of more rational approaches. Otherwise, ridership from the suburbs is likely to dramatically decrease.

Metro should get its house in order before asking for more money. I ride four stops, and if I park at Metro, it comes out to over $7.00 a day. I could drive & park for less at the office and I do have to pay for parking there.
Metro needs to look at its bloated salaries, it's waste, the fact that they continue to do things that drive us away from the system rather than attract us to it.

At the meeting in Rockville, more than one person brought up the fact that it's not possible to buy Ride-On or other passes using a SmartTrip card. Those of us who get transit subsidies from our employers have received MetroCheks in the past, which could be used to buy passes, but MetroCheks are being phased out in favor of credits to our SmartTrip cards. So, we end up having to pay more, because we can't buy the passes that let us ride at a discount.

Here's my idea: make the discount one gets for buying a pass built-in to the SmartTrip software. The SmartTrip cards already "know" when a rider has transferred from Metrorail to Ride-On. It would be relatively simple to write the discount in the software. For example, if a SmartTrip card has been used for Ride-On trips adding up to $10 within a 14-day period, then the remaining trips during that period should be free, because Ride-On sells two-week passes for $10.

This would be very helpful and should be easy to do.

I think Metro needs to work on reducing operating costs. Removing carpet and going to one seat color is a start.

When I said:

"It's ridiculous to argue that the people who live further in the suburbs should pay more than the others b/c they are better off."

I didn't mean it that people who ride short distances should pay the same as people who ride long distances as one person understood it.

What I meant is that the fare increase should be the same across the board! Riders from further out already pay a hefty amount more than the ones who ride shorter distances, so this is just unnecessarily widening the gap even more.

I already pay 3.70 for one way trip (and 3.75 for parking) to work on the trains, while others pay 1.50. I'm not saying that's unfair, that's fine! What I do have a problem with is me paying 4.50 each way (and 4.85 for parking) while short distance riders ride for only 1.80 or 1.90. That's a bit excessive!

Metro needs to present a plan to find numerous ways to cut waste and to improve service before asking for fare increase. Also, why is it logical to ask rail riders to subside bus riders. Provided there was a reason in the very beginning, why is it fair to make the gap even bigger by squeezing rail riders further. How about everyone pays 10%, or 15% or whatever until we get the required millions.

I already pay 3.70 for one way trip (and 3.75 for parking) to work on the trains, while others pay 1.50. I'm not saying that's unfair, that's fine! What I do have a problem with is me paying 4.50 each way (and 4.85 for parking) while short distance riders ride for only 1.80 or 1.90. That's a bit excessive!

Find a job closer to where you live then. Or vice versa, move closer to your job. And if you don't/wont'/can't do that, then sorry, you have to eat that cost. It only makes sense to pay more if you ride longer, and it only makes sense that the increase for longer trips should be proportionately larger than the increase for shorter trips. Should you not have to use more gas just because you live farther away. Should your car magically not get as much wear and tear, or accumulate as many miles because you live farther away?

I love all these people that say this will drive them back into their cars. Please do. Will make my metro trip much more enjoyable to have less crowded cars and won't have nearly as many problems with people jamming onto trains, blocking the doors and not allowing them to shut. I'll pay 30 cents more for that.

There's a lot of tough talk here. "If fares go up, I'll never ride again!" Sounds quite similar to the discussions during the last round of increases; and the ones before that.

Seems like there's a lot of angst around this topic because people are being forced to ask some tough personal questions like:

- Is my job good enough to warrant the new cost of this commute?
- Is my house/property/neighborhood so great that I refuse to consider moving despite increasing monetary/physical/emotional costs?
- Is this region the only place that I can find work? The only place that I could ever consider living?
- How does this "quality of life" thing I've heard so much about really work?

I was a happy commuter when my office was reasonably close to my home. It eventually moved to a location that, daily, required more time on the commute that I was willing to invest. My position more than satisfied my needs but the costs changed and I took my leave. After a few attempts/years, I've landed with an employer that is equally pleasant and even closer to my residence.

Did I have to make the change? Nope. But I did because I took a look at what was causing me pain and *I* addressed it by changing my situation. Had things not come together as desired, yes, I did have a plan to move to another area/region where my needs would be met.

I understand the financial impact this fare increase will have for the "big" commuter. I also understand that change does and will happen.

I'm not saying "if you can't afford it, move" but I am recommending that if you find this increase is going to push you over the edge, you really should be looking at the larger picture to see where you can/should be landing.

There really are more choices than simply Metro vs. Drive.

Instead of increasing the number of Reserved Spots, Metro should move them closer to the station entrance.

Why?

The Reserved Spaces should be viewed as premium parking spaces, not just a guaranteed space. If you put them closer to the station entrance, instead of in the middle of the parking lots or garages, then commuters with Reserved Spaces will park in their own spaces, thus freeing up spaces for other commuters. To me if they pay more for a parking space, they should at least have the privilege to park near the station entrance. Now many commuters with Reserved Spaces will bypass their space if there is a space open closer to the station entrance. This concept will make everyone happy. This concept is used at at Six Flags, for example. Premium parking spaces are closer to the park's front gate. Park goers pay more for a premium space to have the privilege to park closer to the park entrance.

Upper Marlboro - Excellent point -- most businesses use the same approach, with reserved parking spaces are closer to the entrance and unreserved spots further away.

I understand why the outside the district people are angered by the rate hike, as it affects them more than the district peeps, but we really aren't paying ENOUGH for the system as it is. METRO is the 2nd most used subway in the country. Our traffic is just getting worse, so we should be considering MORE METRO service, and rates to reflect that expansion. The trains in the morning and evening rushes are packed like sardines...and people busing from Georgetown (like myself) are continually amazed that M Street doesn't have a subway! METRO not only needs to maintain, it needs to expand!

The other way to compensate for this is do do as they do in NYC: raise taxes and develop a dedicated funding source for the METRO. In lieu of that, they are going to raise rates.

And with gas rising in cost for both private cars and for the fuel to run the electrical plants (which provide METRO power,) I'm pretty sure the 'savings' one would get with a private car are soon erased.

as long as the parking lots fill up, the rates are too low, it's basic economics

this is terrible, i use a smartcard and had some $100 dollars in it, and is evaporating incredibly fast, than I started to pay attention and noticed the hike in the prices....I will have to find a way to avoid using metro all together or change jobs, is crazy