Editor’s Note: This article is based on a speech presented by Member Hank Fung at the Metrolink public hearing on April 23. (The Metrolink board did approve the fare restructuring as originally proposed).

The entire speech, as well as the spreadsheets, will be available at http://socata.lerctr.org/hfstmt0404.html.

Thank you for giving me the opportunity to speak today. I am a resident of Pomona who commutes on the San Bernardino Line regularly to work.

I have questions about the proposed 2005 fare restructuring. Staff has stated that fare increases will not exceed 8% per year under the Metrolink fare restructuring. To check the veracity of this statement, I inputted all of the current fare zones into a spreadsheet.

I found that the fare jump from 2004 to 2005 could potentially be up to 55% for some riders. For instance, a student catching a train to go from Cal State LA to Burbank Airport will pay 22% more effective July 1, 2005 to make that trip. This is in contrast with the 8% maximum fare increase stated in literature handed to riders.

With the off peak and senior/disabled fares, a total of 13,780 fares will need to be programmed. This is in sharp contrast to the 70 fares in the current fare system. When a new station is added, another 500 fares have to be calculated and inputted into every single fare machine in the system. The sheer number of fares required is one reason why Metrolink has purchased new fare machines. Yet, the fare machines are showing glitches. Will introducing more fares exacerbate the technical issues with the machines? Will these issues be resolved in 12 months, without new issues occurring?

Certainly, the increase in the number in fares will cause passenger confusion. No other commuter rail agency has chosen to embark on such a fare restructuring as Metrolink is planning on in 2005. Indeed, other commuter rail operators, such as CalTrain, have opted to reduce the number of zones, not increase them.

Finally, Board members should be reminded that Metrolink does not operate in a vacuum. There are commuter buses that parallel many Metrolink lines, as well as carpools and vanpools .Other shifts in behavior could occur that may not be obvious at first when the fare structure is implemented. Will there be extra demand on the shuttle from Burbank to Burbank Airport? Will more passengers choose to get off the train at Cal State LA instead of riding in to Union Station, and transfer to local transit there?

Thus, an alternative that should be considered is creating smaller zones. Instead of 11 mile zones, a system with 7 or 8 mile zones could deliver many of the benefits of this fare restructuring, while reducing passenger confusion caused by such an expansion of zones. Another way of addressing the issue would be just to place the stations that do not conform to the zone structure in the correct zone.