30% higher San Diego County bus, train and trolley fares are on the horizon. Now what?

Higher public transit fares for daily commuters and occasional riders alike could take effect across San Diego County within months following two separate votes by the boards of the Metropolitan Transit System and the North County Transit District on Thursday. 

The elected officials on both agencies’ boards approved plans to increase one-way fares by 30% and monthly fares by nearly 32% in two phases over the next year and a half. A 20% increase would take place this fall. The second increase would be in fall 2027.

The two transit agencies see regionwide fare increases as a way to make up for lost revenue and address budget issues related to federal funding reductions and ridership losses since the pandemic, among other challenges. Officials from both agencies said that if they couldn’t find a way to get more revenue, they risked having to cut service and jobs in the years to come. 

Several critics of the fare increase spoke out at the MTS meeting, but no one from the public addressed the NCTD board. 

Q: How much will public transit cost?

A: The current $2.50 cost to ride North County’s Breeze bus and Sprinter train, as well as San Diego’s trolleys and buses, would go up to $3 in the fall. That would then increase to $3.25 the next year. 

North County’s Flex service would go from $5 to $6 and then $6.50. The Coaster would no longer have three separate zones for travel priced at $5, $5.75 and $6.50. Instead, travel in one zone would cost $6.50 and then $7. 

A regional adult monthly pass would increase from $72 to $85 this fall, before moving up to $95 the next year. A day pass would go from $6 to $7.

Q: Is it a done deal at the moment?

A: The proposal must still be approved by the San Diego Association of Governments Transportation Committee. It’s expected to go before the committee for final consideration in May and June meetings

SANDAG was part of the process of drafting the plans, and NCTD CEO Shawn Donaghy said that even without NCTD approving fare changes, SANDAG’s Transportation Committee could vote to raise fares anyway. 

“The transit agency doesn’t necessarily have a lot of control over the outcomes that are related to regional items,” he said. “In this case, I think there was a very concerted effort by SANDAG to make sure that the agencies were heard.” 

Q: Why is this happening now? 

A: The agencies began studying a fare increase and surveying riders about transit last year. While people complained about the proposed hikes at the Thursday meetings, officials had said that people generally prioritized consistent service and said they supported fare changes if necessary. 

The proposals come at a time when the public transit agencies are trying to close budget gaps. NCTD, which currently has a $178.8 million budget, expects to have a $16 million budget deficit by fiscal year 2028. MTS, which has a $473.1 million budget, expects an annual budget deficit to grow from $118 million to $146 million over the next four fiscal years.

“I don’t want to vote to increase fares and I don’t want to vote to cut service, but it’s one or the other,” MTS Board Chair Stephen Whitburn said. “Even the transit riders who make the least amount of money have told us consistently that given the choice between increasing fares and cutting their service, they would rather that we increase fares because the service is that important to them.”

NCTD expects the fare increase to increase its revenue annually by $650,000 in the first phase and $1.2 million in the second phase. Fare revenue currently makes up about 7% of the NCTD operating budget, or $12.5 million annually. 

The regionwide fare hike is the first of its kind in years. NCTD last had fare increases in 2008-2009 and 2019. 

The agencies were exploring two options, one with higher fare increases than the other. After receiving public feedback, they ultimately approved a phased approach, which starts with the lower raise this fall before increasing next year. 

Q: How could it affect ridership?

A: Both agencies expect ridership losses from the change. 

NCTD estimates it will lose about 141,000 annual riders or under 2% of passengers in the first phase, and some 235,000 or under 3% in the second. 

MTS officials said it expects to have 1.8 million fewer trips – a decline of 2.2% – in the first phase and 2.8 million fewer trips, a 3.4% drop, in the second phase. 

Q: How could it affect revenue?

A: Both agencies will gain revenue from the fare increases, but still not enough to close their budget gaps.

MTS projects the fare increase would generate $9 million in the first year and $14.2 million per year after the increase is phased in.

For MTS, more funding is crucial to avoid service cuts, officials said Thursday. Without new funding by 2029, MTS officials expect they would have to start making annual service cuts.

By 2030, its fare increase would leave the agency with a $42 million deficit as opposed to an $87 million deficit it projected without the increase. 

NCTD projects the fare increase to increase its revenue annually by $650,000 in the first phase and $1.2 million in the second phase. 

“I don’t want to give anyone the impression that this solves our deficit issue,” Donaghy said Thursday, adding that it was a “tool in the toolbox” to “right-size where we should be.”

Q: What do people have to say? 

A: The MTS board voted 7-4, with support from Coronado City Councilmember Carrie Downey, Lemon Grove City Councilmember Jennifer Mendoza, Imperial Beach City Councilmember Matthew Leyba-Gonzalez, La Mesa City Councilmember Patricia Dillard, Santee City Councilmember Ronn Hall, San Diego City Councilmember Stephen Whitburn and El Cajon City Councilmember Steve Goble.

Chula Vista Councilmember,  Cesar Fernandez, National City Councilmember Marcus Bush, and San Diego city councilmembers Henry Foster and Sean Elo-Rivera voted against the increase. They articulated that the agency should continue looking for other ways to make up the money. 

Elo-Rivera said, “Before I’m willing to ask a working mom in City Heights to pay 50 cents more to get to her second or third job, I think I have to be able to look her in the face, and if she asks me, ‘Did we do everything possible to keep that 50 cents in her pocket?’ I want to be able to tell her ‘Yes,’ and I don’t think I could do that in this moment.”

Several of the 17 public commenters expressed a similar sentiment: It should not be a choice between transit workers losing jobs and riders paying more. 

Speaker Dale McEnany said the agency should keep working to get state funding as opposed to increasing fares. 

“This conversation puts working class San Diegans who rely on public transit as well as MTS workers in a difficult situation,” McEnany said. “I understand that no one wants to be here speaking on either side of this issue. However, I feel like it needs to be pointed out that this fare increase will not be enough to avoid operational cuts.” 

Nate Fairman, the business manager for the union IBW Local 465, which represents hundredsof the MTS employees, said that this proposal was good for them. “I understand that some may find it difficult to get behind this, but your operators, your mechanics, your bus drivers, plead with you to support this,” he said. “This is a modest increase. It’s in line with industry standard, and it helps save public transit at a time that no one else is coming to save us.”

While the MTS meeting was crowded and had significant opposition to the increases, the NCTD board passed the measure unanimously and with no public speakers in the afternoon.

In addition to approving the fare increase, the NCTD board also voted to send a letter to SANDAG advocating for a study of a low-income fare program. Currently discounted ridership rates are offered to people 65 and over, people with disabilities and people on Medicare.