The Washington PostDemocracy Dies in Darkness

Metro just installed new fare gates. It’s spending $35 million to make them taller.

Fare evasion is rising at a time when the financially struggling transit agency is seeking to replace riders lost to telework

March 23, 2023 at 3:17 p.m. EDT
New Metro fare gates seen at Federal Center SW. Metro is considering modifying the gates with taller barriers that prevent fare evasion. (The Washington Post)
7 min
correction

A previous version of this article incorrectly said about one-third of Metrobus trip fares are paid. About one-third are unpaid. The article has been corrected.

Metro has begun modifying fare gates at all stations and installing taller barriers to reduce fare evasion, which has proliferated during the pandemic and grown into a top complaint of riders.

Transit officials presented their plan to Metro’s board on Thursday, four months after Metro Transit Police restarted enforcement at D.C. stations following years of looking the other way. Transit police have also stepped up enforcement in Maryland and Virginia.

Fare evasion is rising at a time when the financially struggling transit agency is seeking to replace riders lost to telework. While lost fares from nonpaying riders represent a small percentage of Metro’s more than $2 billion operating budget, critics say it’s a symptom of growing disorder within the system. Regional lawmakers have said Metro needs to tamp down on evasion and limit fare losses before asking them for help to bridge a $700 million budget shortfall next year.

Metro estimates that it loses about $40 million a year to evasion, or just under 2 percent of its annual operating budget. While fare evasion is more prevalent on the Metrobus system — where about one-third of trips are unpaid — transit officials said 13 percent of rail riders do not pay fares, according to an analysis conducted between Jan. 1 and March 8.

After lax enforcement, Metro to issue fare evasion citations

The issue has put a spotlight on Metro’s $70 million installation of more than 1,200 fare gates over the last two years. The new gates are touch-free, process mobile payments, display SmarTrip balances and improve Metro’s ability to collect ridership data. But they also are waist-high and do little to deter people from jumping over gates or squeezing through narrow dividers. Metro officials have acknowledged the agency should have considered different barriers during the massive replacement project.

Metro General Manager Randy Clarke said Thursday that reducing fare evasion was among the first issues board members asked him to tackle. He said he launched a multipronged effort that included increasing enforcement, adding awareness campaigns, partnerships with schools urging students to use free fare cards D.C. provides and research of fare gate designs to physically stop evasion.

In November, Metro launched a pilot at the Fort Totten station, modifying fare gates to gauge their effectiveness at deterring evasion.

The first design involved placing arches on top of gates to prevent people from using them to balance while swinging their legs over the dividers. In that scenario, people simply squeezed through the dividers, transit officials said. A second design proved more effective: When outfitted with 48-inch-tall saloon-style laminated plastic doors that were difficult to jump over, Metro officials saw an immediate change in customer behavior, as well as a reduction in nonpaid entries.

Transit leaders saw enough success in the new barriers to advance a plan to retrofit the entire system’s fare gates — a project Metro said will take about 15 months and cost between $35 million and $40 million — roughly half the price of the gates themselves.

Metro already is working to retrofit all fare gates at Fort Totten by this month, with work set to start at another nine stations in a phased approach until the new barriers are installed systemwide next year.

1 in 3 Metrobus rides goes unpaid amid rise in fare evasions during pandemic

The modification comes as Metrorail in recent weeks has been recording its highest ridership numbers since the start of the pandemic. Tom Webster, Metro’s vice president of strategy, planning and program management, said 405,328 trips were taken Wednesday, of which 11 percent — more than 45,000 — were unpaid. Metro’s new fare gates have sensors to detect when riders jump over or squeeze through without paying.

By comparison, in February 2020, Metrorail was averaging 638,000 trips on weekdays, although that number includes only trips that were paid.

The installation of the new barriers may require the loss of fare pass aisles at some stations because of the space the plexiglass doors require to operate, Webster said. A single door would be installed in standard aisles, swinging open in one direction, while double doors would be installed at wider aisles designated for riders with disabilities.

Board members voiced no opposition to the plan, which Clarke called an “operational” decision he made after tests and engineering analysis. The project does not require board approval.

“This is what we’re doing moving forward,” he said.

Michael Goldman, a Metro board member who also serves as chair of the Washington Suburban Transit Commission, which represents Maryland transportation interests, said he would have preferred that Metro install the new gates at Fort Totten, then analyze their effectiveness over three or four months before converting the entire 97-station system.

“You don’t pour the concrete until you know where the drivers are going,” he said.

Clarke said extensive engineering research indicated that Metro had limited options without removing the new gates and custom infrastructure that supports them, including motors and communications cables — a far more expensive ordeal.

Fare evasion in D.C. is rising. Money troubles are pushing Metro to confront it.

“Absent of ripping out all of the gates and starting from scratch, which I don’t think anyone is supportive of, this is the optimal solution in those spaces using the [current] equipment and trying to be cost-contained at the same time,” Clarke said.

Retrofitting panels onto gates required testing in a lab to determine whether one or two panels worked best, the force with which a gate needed to withstand, designs that wouldn’t harm riders with disabilities, and the maximum panel height and weight the gates’ motors could handle.

Among other efforts to boost revenue, Metro is on track to impose its first fare increase in more than five years in July. The increase would cost a rider, on average, about 5 percent more per trip, but it would also pay for targeted fare cuts for some riders.

Critics of aggressive efforts by transit agencies to ticket or arrest fare evaders say the offense is primarily driven by need. Clarke, in turn, has proposed a discount program for low-income riders that would cut fares in half for those eligible for federal food assistance. Metro has also proposed cutting base Metrorail fares for all riders to $2 to match Metrobus fares.

To pay for the discounts, which board members will vote on next month as part of Metro’s 2024 fiscal year operating budget, transit officials are proposing to increase distance-based charges from a rate that currently varies between 21 and 33 cents for each mile, depending on the time of day, to 40 cents per mile on weekdays before 9:30 p.m.

Under the existing proposal, the cost for the longest rides would increase by 50 cents, capped at $6.50. Riders who travel long distances on weekdays during periods outside of rush-hour periods could see an increase of $2.50 a trip.

Metro’s Maryland and Virginia board members have pushed back on that increase for weeks. After a lengthy discussion Thursday, board members settled on cutting the proposed maximum fare to $6. Board member and Loudoun County Supervisor Matthew F. Letourneau (R-Dulles), who proposed the lower maximum, said a fare jump could harm Metro’s efforts to develop new suburban customers.

Maryland’s Goldman, who had hoped to lower the proposed distance rate even further, said he accepted the compromise, which board supported unanimously.

“If I can’t get a loaf of bread, I’ll settle for a slice,” he said.

The change means Metro would need to find about $2 million more to balance its budget. Clarke said Metro has been combining redundant backroom administrative services — for instance, consolidating call centers — and had found enough potential savings to cover the difference.

Board members also heard two reports Thursday about Metro’s efforts to modernize, reduce its environmental footprint and increase trust in its transit police department.

Environmental groups have criticized Metro for its goal of transitioning its bus fleet to zero-emission vehicles by 2045, saying peer agencies have far more aggressive goals. On Thursday, Metro staff members said the agency will move up that timeline by three years.

Transit police will also start training with body-worn cameras this month. Officers will begin wearing them April 2, with a full rollout completed by summer, Clarke said. Metro has purchased 455 of the cameras.