TPC Chairman Carl Durocher made the point that Mayor Dave Cieslewicz said he would appeal the rejection of the 50 cent fare increase to the full City Council, and that a 25 cent increase, to $1.75, might prevent that.

"It could be a bridge to get us to a different economic climate locally, congressionally and nationally, and I don't think it will be the bridge to nowhere," Durocher said.

Despite the addition of a low-income fare option at the suggestion of Cieslewicz, members of the commission, who voted 5-4 against the 50 cent increase, repeated concerns about what a higher fare would do to the health of Metro Transit, particularly in a bad economy.

"Gas prices are very low right now and we're going to make it hard for Metro to compete with that," commission member Amanda White said.

White argued that after a record 6 percent increase in ridership in 2008, a fare increase would cause ridership to stagnate.

Metro Transit staff predicted a 1 percent increase in ridership in 2009, but other models presented by commission members suggested ridership could drop.

There has not been an increase in cash fares since 2000, and TPC member Kenneth Streit suggested the body may want to consider smaller, more frequent increases to make fares correspond better with inflation.

The plan approved Tuesday includes corresponding increases in multiride and discount passes and was approved by a 5-4 vote.

The mayor's low-income fare proposal was not part of the plan passed but will be taken up at the commission's next meeting.

Commission members who voted against a 50 cent increase questioned whether the low-income fare, which would offer 400 half-price monthly passes each month beginning April 2009, would be enough.

But Lisa Subeck of the Dane County YWCA, who had been working with the mayor on the proposal, said increasing the fare was a better alternative to cutting service and the proposed low-income fare was a start to the city working on a long-term solution.

The proposal from the mayor's office included plans for an ad-hoc committee to plan for low-income fares past 2009.

Subeck also explained the proposed low-income fare would complement the day passes issued by community service providers as well as the city's Transit for Jobs program. The monthly pass would help the working poor, who could use the monthly passes for work and errands, while day passes could be used by those looking for work.

Cieslewicz has wanted a 50 cent cash fare increase to $2 and corresponding increases to balance Metro Transit's budget for this year. But last month, the Transit and Parking Commission, which sets fares and service levels, refused to do so with a 7-2 vote, citing concerns about a loss of ridership and the impact on low-income people.

Cieslewicz called the vote "irresponsible" and the TPC agreed to his request to revisit its vote.

The meeting attracted a large public audience, with more than an hour of testimony, including members of the City Council on both sides of the fare issue.

While Ald. Satya Rhodes-Conway, 12th District, called the choice between service cuts and a fare increase a "false dichotomy," as the council could vote to amend the Metro budget, others urged the commission to ensure increased revenue for Metro.

"I don't want to be in a situation of chronically underfunding Metro," said Ald. Julia Kerr, 13th District. "I'm here to let you know unequivocally that cutting service in my district would be devastating."

The 25 cent increase would leave a projected $354,000 budget deficit in the Metro Transit budget.

Ald. Brian Solomon, 10th District, who proposed the compromise, suggested the commission forgo implementing $150,000 in service enhancements, which were proposed by the mayor in a larger budget package to improve the bus system. Because the commission only has authority over service changes and fare increases, he said he would leave other potential cuts to the Metro Transit staff.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, this material is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes.