DC Councilmember proposes residents get $100 monthly towards transit

It's appropro since Luxembourg's free transit program just kicked in at the beginning of the month ("Luxembourg has launched the world's first free nationwide public transpor," Telegraph) and given other free transit initiatives that have received media attention over the past few months ("Revisiting free transit in the wake of the decision in Kansas City ... and Lawrence, Massachusetts") that DC City Councilmember Charles Allen has suggested a form of this for DC.

-- "D.C. Council member proposes free public transit for residents," Washington Post

Because most of the transit provided in the city is delivered by the metropolitan operator, WMATA, which provides bus and subway service, and this is done in conjunction with Virginia and Maryland, DC can't unilaterally make transit free, instead he proposes (1) the $100 credit; (2) a $100 million fund to improve bus service; and (3) some means testing.

Given that most research on transit choice finds that middle and higher income households don't find price to be the primary barrier to transit use, it's important to figure out if this is best way to use funds on transit priorities.

(The "Revisiting free transit" piece summarizes a bunch of the issues around free transit.)

Another problem is that the way the agreement between the three jurisdictions is set up, DC can't unilaterally pay for funding improvements to intra-city transit, and increases in ridership and service trigger greater "subsidy payments" to the agency's annual operating budget.

I don't know the ins and outs of this element of the Compact, but according to GGW commenter Alfred Harf:

As I understand WMATA’s subsidy allocation formula, 15% of the allocation is based on ridership by jurisdiction, while bus revenue hours and miles are other (even more significant) factors in the calculation. More DC riders resulting from the subsidy (and the prospect of more revenue hours and miles to accommodate those additional riders) will increase the District’s share of the total bus subsidy, an expense that to the best of my knowledge has not been acknowledged.

Seattle and Salt Lake add city-specific transit service within a metropolitan transit system. Unfortunately, it appears as if there isn't a way for a DC-area jurisdiction to significantly improve local bus service through Metrobus, the way that citizens in both Seattle and Salt Lake City voted to pay additional taxes in order to improve transit service within their city despite lack of similar support or interest from the rest of their respective counties--in both cases service is provided on a county or multi-county basis by a metropolitan or regional transit provider.

In Seattle, they made the entire city a "Transportation Benefit District" and approved an add on tax to support it, which provides about $50 million/year in additional funding.  Separately, Salt Lake City has subsidized purchase of monthly transit passes by residents. Both areas have experienced significant gains in ridership, even as most transit agencies nationally are seeing declines.

Note that some Utah resort communities, like Park City, have free transit, which shapes attitudes around the state in some jurisdictions. For example, a poll during the recent mayoral election in Salt Lake found that 75% of those polled favored free transit. And in the core of Salt Lake, as a congestion and transit promotion measure, there is a free fare zone, which has existed for a couple decades.

Conclusion.  What I think should be done:

(1) Invest money in more transit, in structural ways, for example like how I suggested last week the region should create a defined overnight transit network ("Metrorail night hour extension vs. creating a metropolitan overnight transit network"); streetcar expansion, which the city has scotched; and advocacy for a separated Blue Line subway ("A "Transformational Projects Action Plan" for the Metrorail Blue Line").

(2) Instead of providing transit free "to everyone," focus on providing transit fare subsidies to low income households, along the lines suggested by Councilmember Allen, as a DC specific initiative that doesn't require approval of the other jurisdictions.

Note that San Francisco has offered a half price monthly transit pass for many years.  The Puget Sound area has recently introduced a similar product, and so has New York City.  In the case of Greater Seattle and NYC, these discounts are provided by the local jurisdictions, not the transit agency.  In SF, the city transit agency pays for the discount, which doesn't work on other transit services.

In the DC area, seniors are eligible for discounted fares, and some jurisdictions provide free transit passes for youths, including DC, Arlington, and Montgomery County.

(3) Create a capping system on fares equal to the cost of a transit pass, so that people don't have to buy transit passes specifically, in order to get the best pricing for fares.

For example, in London and Melbourne, there is a cap on how much a rider has to pay per day. But it doesn't increment up to the level of a weekly or monthly pass.

While I don't think it has been implemented, Edmonton has proposed a transit fare capping system which would increment up to the cost of a monthly pass, after which it would stop assessing fares.

From the Edmonton Journal article "New smart cards for Edmonton Transit boast a 'social justice' edge":

People with steady jobs and good paycheques are the most likely to buy a monthly pass. They have cash on hand at the beginning of the month.

Those who might need their last nickel just to keep the lights on are the most likely to pay cash for every trip. It means they pay $3.25 per ride, more money for the same service.

That’s one reason Ken Koropeski is excited about Smart Fare.

With a card and an online account, the system can track how many times a person uses transit during a 30-day period, said Koropeski, director of special projects for Edmonton Transit. No one would have to commit to a monthly pass on Day 1. Instead, the system could automatically track use and once the rider hits that monthly maximum, all other rides are free.

“When you have capping, it has inherent benefits for people with low income,” said Koropeski.

(4) To provide some benefits "to everyone", provide funding for at least three free bus fare days (Spring, Summer, Fall) as a promotional and marketing initiative to encourage transit use by non-riders.

(5) Address elements in the subsidy formula that penalize individual jurisdictions for paying into the Metrobus system for service expansions (otherwise jurisdictions may increase non-Metrobus service instead).