Time For "Same Old"...Fare Increases, Service Cuts

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/07/15/ ... rvice-cuts

WBBM 780 reports that METRA is considering fare increases and service cuts, because of course "we're broke".

Brief passage:

• CHICAGO (CBS) — Metra is preparing riders for higher fares and possible service cuts next year.
  
  Officials said Friday that some action appears inescapable.
  
  Fare increases could run anywhere from 8 to 21percent, depending where the agency attempts to peg fuel prices, which it grossly underestimated this year at $2.35 a gallon.
  
  Metra Deputy Executive Director George Hardwidge said the amount of the increase depends on the level of service cuts.
  
  He said it appears that the majority of riders, who use Metra to get to and from work primarily, are far more willing to accept fare increases than service cuts.
  
  Senior Capital Planning Director Lynnette Ciavarella said, with the exception of Boston, which last increased its fares in 2007, Metra is well below the industry average for fare increases since 2004

Included within the WBBM reportage are the trains on each route that would be cut. Of interest to me is BNSF 1299 departing CUS 1140P. While normally Chicago Symphony concerts are over with adequate time to walk from Orchestra Hall to CUS to catch 1297, 1040P, every so often there will be a concert for which that is not possible. 1240A is simply toolong to wait - but then a $75 taxicab ride home is not all that "palatable'.

For Amtrak connecting passengers from any of the Midwest Corridor trains arriving during the 11PM range, cutting BNSF 1299 will also "make for a bad day"; all too many passengers on those trains are not about to afford a taxicab ride home to the "Land ofthe Burlingtons".

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Of interest to me is BNSF 1299 departing CUS 1140P. While normally Chicago Symphony concerts are over with adequate time to walk from Orchestra Hall to CUS to catch 1297, 1040P, every so often there will be a concert for which that is not possible. 1240A is simply toolong to wait - but then a $75 taxicab ride home is not all that "palatable'.

For Amtrak connecting passengers from any of the Midwest Corridor trains arriving during the 11PM range, cutting BNSF 1299 will also "make for a bad day"; all too many passengers on those trains are not about to afford a taxicab ride home to the "Land ofthe Burlingtons".

Then one may have to use the "Gateway to the Overland Route" to get the "Land of the Burlingtons", if 1299, et. al. are indeed sacrificed to appease the budgetary gods. I'm referring to Metra UP/W 73, dep. OTC @2340, which can be taken into various locations in DuPage or Kane county; many stations along this segment are about 5-7 miles north of the BNSF corridor. The kicker of course, includes a cab ride south from "North Western land" to a home nearest your Burlington destination, but it will certainly be a lot cheaper than one from the city. From my observations, the Lombard, Glen Ellyn, Wheaton, and Geneva stations have very good late-night cab service, with the others being "iffy" at best...

Yes, Mr. Doepack, I guess for me to use the C&NW to Elmhurst and taxicab home from there would save a few bucks, but take it from one who drives Rte 83 at least once a week (even retired; it was more like once a day when I was in practice), be it noted that is not exactly a drive along a country road.

The best thing for me would be to ask Mr. Doepack to write, in Italian of course, "Maestro Muti, please do not plan any CSO programs that will let out after 1015P....". Or if you need to brush up on your Italian, how about writing Pagano's First Lieutenant Rick Tidwell (seems like he got out of "the mess" with his hands clean) to keep that BNSF 1299 "a chuggin" so that his one-time colleague (I knew Rick "along the way") can have a backup to get home from the CSO.

Thanks in advance.

The full report including specific trains to be cut can be found on the Metra web site at http://metrarail.com/content/dam/metra/ ... eComte.pdf

The MD-W cuts include a train I use when I can get away from work a few minutes early.

I always find it interesting how government agencies always view shortfalls as "muse raise prices (fares) and cut service" rather than what can we do to stimulate revenue. GBN mentions how the lack of a 2340 will affect him getting home from the symphony. My wife and I regularly attend theater in the city. The current lack of a 2340 on the MD-W (2240, then 0040) is what keeps us driving. Very few shows finish in time for a 2240 departure and two hours more is just way too long to wait.

lstone19 wrote:
I always find it interesting how government agencies always view shortfalls as "muse raise prices (fares) and cut service" rather than what can we do to stimulate revenue.

Mass transit agencies in this country will always rely on subsidies, unless our population density increases to levels as seen in Japan, etc. In order to "stimulate revenue" and make $2 from $1, you need to start out with that $1. If you don't get that $1, then nothing happens.

The key to making mass transportation work is to make it preferable to other alternatives.

Raise the rates too much and it becomes cheaper to drive and park then park and ride. Cut service and it becomes easier to drive than wait for the next train. But keeping rates artificially low through increased subsidies isn't a long term solution ... nor is running trains at a great loss simply for convenience.

Metra needs to look for efficiencies that will cut costs ... if that means dropping a few runs that are less popular it is unfortunate. It would be nice to have hourly service (or better) all the way to the last train of the day well after Midnight to serve the late night potential demand but Metra needs to figure out a way to make that work financially.

A couple of years ago NICTD modified their weekend schedule to save costs and better serve the actual demand. They were running a simple "every two hour" schedule with no late night returns beyond Michigan City. The new schedule has less full line trains but runs them at better times including a run after 11pm that goes all the way to South Bend (previously the last train all the way to South Bend was at 8pm CT). This makes the service a much better choice for festivals and evening entertainment ... but it came at the cost of losing midday weekend trains. There have been staff cuts and overtime cuts as well as a fare increase ... and farebox recovery remains under 50%. Fortunately "capital" projects are funded separately so the repairs and upgrades needed to keep the line functional are not being affected.

Metra is facing the same challenges ... how to best spend what they have. How to best manage their resources to best serve ALL of their customers. There will be compromises. Some people's favorite trains will be cut - likely the ones that would be the most subsidized.

byte wrote:

lstone19 wrote:
I always find it interesting how government agencies always view shortfalls as "must raise prices (fares) and cut service" rather than what can we do to stimulate revenue.

Mass transit agencies in this country will always rely on subsidies, unless our population density increases to levels as seen in Japan, etc. In order to "stimulate revenue" and make $2 from $1, you need to start out with that $1. If you don't get that $1, then nothing happens.

I see subsidies as a completely separate matter. Mass transit agencies should pursuing "profit" maximization even when maximizing means minimizing a loss. I'm not convinced that most mass transit agencies know how to do that. It seems in many cases, level of service is set reactively to funds available (revenue plus subsidy) rather than proactively to maximize profit (minimize loss).

A couple of other comments:

- those low-ridership last trains are important to more than just the people who actually ride them. Their presence acts as safety net for those who plan to take the next-to-last train of the night. Eliminate the safety net, you eliminate ridership from the earlier train. The two hour gap most lines have between the next-to-last and last trains reduces their value. I would not be surprised if just moving them up an hour would be positive (2230, then 2330 instead on 2230, then 0030).

- Most ridership is round-trip. Eliminate the "unprofitable" runs and you'll find you're also removing ridership from the busier runs. As we say in the airline business where I work, you can't shrink yourself to profitability because most passengers are not making their decision based on whether on particular flight exists or not but rather on the "network".

If the next fare increase can prevent Metra from using capital funds to cover shortfalls in operating expenses, that would be a good start. But Metra faces a tough balancing act, because anything over 10% could start driving riders back to their cars, meaning that the remaining riders will be paying more for less service; while at the same time, a 10% increase still may not be enough to cover the majority of the operating expenses, which means more trips to the capital fund piggy bank. Compounding the problem is the fact that local funding sources have all but dried up, and although Metra did receive $140 million in stimulus funds from the feds two years ago (the majority of the which is being used to finance the F40 rebuild program, with the rest being spent on various station upgrades), that money is just about gone as well. With all that in mind, if the end result is a 5-7% fare increase, with late-night service spared, but Saturday express service eliminated, then perhaps Metra could just limp along like that for 2-3 more years, at least until other funding sources can be identified. That's about the best we can hope for...

"Land of the Burlingtons" notwithstanding, if energy-efficient commuter trains are being dropped, then something isn't working.

I've always wondered why RTA/Metra does not use its own crews to operate the BNSF and UP trains, unlike the practice with the CP/Milwaukee District, etc.?

Isn't this costing Metra more, or is it a case of these two freight railroads being especially friendly to Chicago's commuter trains?

Artur, the reason that Milwaukee and Rock Island trains are operated by METRA's own in house railroad, the NICR, is that both these roads were bankrupt. The success or to each, the Soo Line (that's the CP in the USA) and no one were simply not interested; obviously in the case of the Rock Island, METRA had no choice.

Further, on a bankrupt property, the courts are free to abrogate labor agreements that are considered unreassonable. That gave METRA additional leverage on those properties.

However, on both the C&NW (UP as successor) and the BN (again BNSF as successor) had long standing agreements and institutional expertise in the operation of passenger trains, and were agreeable to entering into Purchase of Service Agreements (POSA) between themselves and METRA.
)

Thank you, Mr. Norman. Hope you don't have to miss your train!

This is the first time Metra has actually threatened with service cuts... previously only the CTA pulled this move. Interestingly included in the cuts would be to change mid-day service on RI to every 90 minutes

Here's a visual chart of Metra's planned service cuts for each route, as well as the projected adjustments to the schedule designed to compensate for the deleted trains...

An article in the Tribune this morning (sorry, no link as I saw it in the Kindle edition) says most of the service cuts are off the table in favor of a 20% fare hike. Article says their survey indicated passengers would rather see a fare hike than service cuts.

lstone19 wrote:An article in the Tribune this morning (sorry, no link as I saw it in the Kindle edition) says most of the service cuts are off the table in favor of a 20% fare hike. Article says their survey indicated passengers would rather see a fare hike than service cuts.

http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2011 ... x-clifford

Brief quote:

Metra officials on Friday all but killed a proposal for weekday service reductions to offset a looming deficit in 2012, adding to the inevitability of fare increases — possibly as high as 20 percent next year alone.
. . .
Clifford reiterated that Metra might need to hike fares as high as 20 percent in 2012, with another, lesser increase in 2013 and regular cost-of-living adjustments after that.

"Remember, this (fare hike) can has been kicked down the road a bit too long. We need to catch up. That's why we're having a big bump," Clifford said.
. . .
Among other findings, more than 31 percent of respondents said they would prefer to pay up to a 25 percent fare increase rather than have service reductions, according to Metra.