OREGON
TRANSPORTATION
INSTITUTE
OTI is a nonprofit corporation dedicated to providing transportation information.
|
TRI MET FARE RECOVERY |
| ||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FISCAL |
FARES |
% |
OPERATIONS |
% |
|
FARE |
|
FARE |
|
|
YEAR |
RECEIVED |
|
EXPENDITURES * |
|
|
RECOVERY RATIO |
|
INCREASES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1993 |
27,469,13 4 |
|
118,238,117 |
|
|
23.23% |
|
FARES INCREASED
|
|
|
1994 |
27,989,86 3 |
1.90% |
127,056,309 |
7.46% |
|
22.03% |
|
|
|
|
1995 |
30,752,00 0 |
9.87% |
143,783,926 |
13.17% |
|
21.39% |
|
FARES INCREAS ED
|
|
|
1996 |
31,965,00 0 |
3.94% |
150,488,089 |
4.66% |
|
21.24% |
|
|
|
|
1997 |
33,685,00 0 |
5.38% |
168,114,636 |
11.71% |
|
20.04% |
|
FARES INCREASED
|
|
|
1998 |
37,029,00 0 |
9.93% |
189,539,212 |
12.74% |
|
19.54% |
|
FARES INCREASED
|
|
|
* DOES NOT INCLUDE DEPRECIATION.
1997 AND 1998 ARE FROM TRI MET BUDGET ESTIMATE.
|
| ||||||||
|
| |||||||||
|
| |||||||||
The following is a summary of the degree of subsidization as of 1993 of several major American public transit systems are compared to the three major Oregon transit operators as of 1997. Figures shown are the Fare Recovery Ratio or what portion of operating costs are Recovered" by passenger fares.
|
U.S. TRANSIT SYSTEMS |
PERCENT PAID BY FARES |
|
|
|
|
Metro North Railroad (New York) |
54 % |
|
New York Transit Authority |
50 % |
|
BART Heavy Rail (San Francisco) |
48 % |
|
Long Island Railroad (New York) |
47 % |
|
Chicago Transit Authority |
47 % |
|
New Jersey Transit |
45 % |
|
SEPTA Bus/Mixed Rail (Philadelphia) |
40 % |
|
MARTA Bus/Heavy Rail (Atlanta) |
40 % |
|
MTC Bus (Minneapolis) |
36 % |
|
MUNI Bus/Light Rail (San Francisco) |
33 % |
|
LACMTA Bus/Light Rail (Los Angeles) |
31 % |
|
PAT Bus/Light Rail (Pittsburgh) |
29 % |
|
RTA Bus/Mixed Rail (Cleveland) |
25 % |
|
MBTA Bus/Mixed Rail (Boston) |
22 % |
|
TRI- |
20 % |
|
Lane County Transit Bus (Eugene) |
14 % |
|
Cherriots Bus (Salem) |
14 % |
The following is a summary of foreign Fare Recovery Ratios as reported in the 1994 edition of Jane's Urban Transport Systems for several major foreign public transit systems. Not included are revenues raised by other commercial activities, which cover most or all of the balance between passenger revenue and operating costs in many cases.
|
BRITISH TRANSIT SYSTEMS |
PERCENT PAID BY FARES |
|
|
|
|
London Underground (Rail) |
100 % |
|
Tyne & Wear Bus, (Newcastle) |
98 % |
|
Lothian Transit Bus (Edinburgh) |
93 % |
|
Strathclyde Bus (Glasgow) |
88 % |
|
Merseyside Bus (Liverpool) |
87 % |
|
Tyne & Wear Light Rail, (Newcastle) |
79 %
|
|
London Transport Bus |
71 % |
|
Strathclyde Metro Rail (Glasgow) |
70 % |
|
EUROPEAN TRANSIT SYSTEMS |
PERCENT PAID BY FARES |
|
|
|
|
Dublin (Bus) |
96 % |
|
Madrdid EMT |
63 % |
|
Lisbon (Bus) |
60 % |
|
Hamburg HVV (Bus/Rail) |
54 % |
|
Bremen BSAG (Bus/Rail) |
47 % |
|
Frankfort FVV (Bus/Rail) |
40 % |
|
Bologna (Bus/Rail) |
34 % |
|
Berlin BVG (Bus/Rail) |
33 % |
|
Athens (Bus) |
27 % |
|
Amsterdam (Rail) |
23 % |
|
OTHER TRANSIT SYSTEMS |
PERCENT PAID BY FARES |
|
|
|
|
Kowloon Motorbus (Hong Kong) |
99 % |
|
Tokyo, Japan (Bus) |
84 % |
|
Tokyo, Japan (Rail) |
79 % |
|
Vancouver, Canada (Bus/Rail) |
48 % |
|
Winnipeg, Canada (Bus) |
46 % |
|
Sydney, Australia (Bus) |
45 % |
In all of these places there is much greater proportionate use of mass transit compared to Portland. The Province of British Columbia passed a law years ago which mandates that public transit systems cannot be more than 65% subsidized. Its "Skytrain" rail system is less than 20% subsidized.
The reason that subsidizing transit fares has proven so ineffective in Portland is that the transit fare itself is only a small part of the total real cost to the traveler. Time is money and most of the real cost of travel is in travel time.
Making mass transit even cheaper does encourage a more discretionary trips.