TRIMET HAS A NEW APPROACH TO ENFORCING FEES

In our metro community, as in many others, the public transit system is far from perfect. There are underserved neighborhoods, inconvenient schedules, and late buses. And just over two years ago a brutal murder on the MAX Green Line made national headlines and forever tainted the image of Portland’s public transportation for its citizens.

However, you cannot argue that transit systems like these are not necessary: They are how thousands of people get to work and back home every single day, after all. So, reform in some way seems clearly required if TriMet hopes to see sustainability in the long-term. 

But it seems TriMet officials and the people who use its services have very different ideas of how to go about it.

On Oct. 22, TriMet announced from its official Twitter page (@TriMet) that it would begin taking initiatives to ensure that riders of both the MAX trains and buses pay their fare before boarding – this initiative being adding “nine new dedicated fare inspectors out on our system” with the job of “checking fares, helping riders, and making sure that our system stays a safe place that is welcoming to all.”

It was a solution decided after the agency’s obvious concern over what it considers a large problem for its institution.

A solution that citizens, mostly fare-paying ones, made vocally clear was a misguided one.

In reply to these tweets, over a thousand Twitter users criticized TriMet’s statements. In one example, user @ghostspiderss replied with the response, “This doesn’t make me feel any more comfortable or safe.” This person goes on to cite their personal experience of witnessing “fare inspectors ask people of color for proof of fare and ignore me because I’m white.” 

Evidently, the everyday Portland metro transit riders did not and do not believe this is the right move for TriMet to take. By making its “solution” to this problem (a problem that many transit users do not believe even particularly exists) a simple crackdown on fare evasion, the agency seems to misunderstand the needs of those people it’s meant to help. 

In another tweet in response to TriMet, writer Chris O’Connor (@ChristopOConnor) argued that “We all want a fare-less system and better, more reliable service. Your leadership is unelected, not responsive to public demands, and I suspect they aren’t commuting to the board meetings by public transit.”

Many others agreed and elaborated on O’Connor’s statement, particularly on the proposal of a completely fareless system.

How is it then, that TriMet believes the answer lies in the assurance of fare payment, while much of Portland’s ridership population seems to widely agree it should be just the opposite?

The suggestion of a fareless transportation system is one much deeper – profound – than people simply wanting a free ride, as it might be interpreted from a more shallow perspective: There is a precedent for this kind of reform. Several cities across the world have successfully transitioned their public transportation services into fareless operation, and seen their traffic and pollution levels decrease as a result. Less total vehicle usage will do that.

Additionally, it would promote increased usage of the transit system, which means more of its tax-supported budget could go toward the better maintenance and innovation many feel is TriMet’s biggest current issue these days, not fare evasion.

As stated previously, TriMet’s services are the only method of commuting for thousands of workers daily, and even with lower fares for low-income riders, it is not by any means affordable for everyone. The pricing for the repeated amount of tickets required for everyday commuting can still easily set you back, and the consequences of such hit those in need the hardest, by far. It is not logical to demand that those most desperately in need of help just to get by, or even just the casual riders of TriMet, pay significant fractions of their total earnings simply to get where they need to be.

TriMet was correct in that change very much needs to take place within our public transportation system. But the agency doesn’t seem to understand how careless monetization even further victimizes commuters.

The outspoken riders in the Portland metro area have made it loud and clear that this is not the way to go, and it is therefore surely in TriMet’s best interest to listen to what they have to say and realize that going fareless very well could be the best “solution” to apply.