Bruce Abel, assistant general manager of the Bus Operations Department for the Regional Transportation District, demonstrates the new smart card technology, Dec. 31 at the Denver Union Station light rail platform. RTD launched its new program on Jan. 1 that uses an embedded chip that instantaneously process information when boarding buses and light rails. (Marla R. Keown/Aurora Sentinel)

AURORA | Activists and residents told Regional Transportation District officials last week they want a simpler, more affordable fare structure.

“The other day I went on the light rail with my partner Downtown. It cost us $16. My car gets 40 miles to the gallon. I think the prices are really a discouragement,” said Andrea Chiriboga-flor, a transit organizer with Colorado 9to5, a group that advocates on behalf of working women.  “It’s a lot cheaper to just drive there.”

Chiriboga-flor was one of around 20 people who attended a public meeting at the Aurora Public Library’s central branch, and was not the only one to have strong words for RTD’s fare structure.

It was because of grumblings throughout the metro region that RTD decided to look at rehauling its fare schedule. Even RTD thinks the zones are not working, which is why it’s seeking public input on the subject.

RTD planner Lacy Bell said at the meeting Colorado’s is one of only three light rail agencies in the U.S. to  have a zone or distance-based fare structure. RTD has four fare zones, where the number of zones you travel in for each one-way trip determines the price. It charges different prices based on the mode of transportation, the least expensive being local light rail or bus rides through two fare zones at $2.25. 

“For most other light rails, it’s a single price no matter where you’re traveling on the light rail system,” Bell said. 

RTD has proposed starting anew by  narrowing what are now 10 transportation categories to 4. Those being local bus service, regional bus service, rail service, and airport rides.

Most commuters who spoke at the meeting said they liked the new categories but wanted to see bus and light rail fares cost the same, and for it to be easier to transfer between the two.

“I can’t get Downtown to my destination without combining them. There are a lot of us who are doing the combo thing,” said one Aurora commuter.

A few residents said they would be willing to pay more for a regional or airport service.

RTD is also looking at changing the fare system so commuters either  pay each time they board a bus or light rail, or pay for a block of three hours that would allow them unlimited rides on either service.

Aurora resident Beverly Kneebone said the three-hour idea would not work because RTD buses are not consistent.

“When you pay for time, you could get penalized for buses that don’t show up,” she said.

Kneebone, who can’t walk fast because of a disability, said she relies on the bus to get to physical therapy from her home near Del Mar Park in Aurora.  

“Sometimes, I have to take four buses,” she said.

Everyone agreed that getting rid of the bus transfer option made sense. One person who attended the meeting recounted having to find another bus to ride home because his one-way transfer ticket did not allow him to take the same bus he rode to his destination.

Another man, who said he often uses the 169L bus to get to and from Denver International Airport, suggested RTD look at creating weekly as well as daily passes like the ones available through Boston and New York’s transit systems.

“We’re hoping to take all this feedback and go to all of the (RTD) board of directors in January,” Bell said.  “Early next year we’ll look at setting price programs with the intent to implement them by January 2016.”

The public is invited to comment on what they would like to see as part of the new fare structure at rtd-denver.com/fare-restructuring.

17 replies on “FARE GAME: RTD solicits new fare comments and get an earful in Aurora”

  1. Our public transportation in Denver is way behind the times. If you travel to any other big city, they have much better connecting times and fares. One of the many reasons the light rail is bleeding money is because it was originally set up to fail. There is no consistent monitoring system for payment of riders. Additionally, I finally had to resort to driving to and from work. It is only 6 miles one way. I had to take 2 buses that did not make timely connections–takes 1 hour to go one way–do the math.

  2. “It’s cheaper to drive” – Which defeats the ENTIRE purpose of having a Public Transportation System, and people wonder why the Brown Cloud still lingers over Denver!

    1. The brown cloud has little to do with car smog. Brown clouds were reported over Denver in the 1850’s. Its called dust.

      1. Well, I wasn’t around in the 1850s, so I can’t really debate you on that. Add several million people and all kinds of related petrochemical and other pollution, and I’ll bet that the brown clouds today have a lot more interesting stuff in them than dust.

    3. The city took the sytem form a private company because fares were raised to a quarter. After the city finished the acquisition, the city raised fares to $.50 The Dem City of Denver still runs it at a loss.

    4. We already have privatized public transit. You can take a taxi or using car-sharing. Tell me with a straight face that Car2Go & Metro Taxi would be better stewards of your tax dollars and allow better oversight by elected officials. You may not like politicians, but the nice thing about elected board members is that they can be voted out of office. Try doing that with the board of directors at Car2Go.

  4. Is the bus/train really that expensive? People seem to want to pay pennies but receive pounds. If someone were to take the bus twice a day (to and from work), in a typical month, it would be $90. Taking the train would be roughly double that at the highest fare (crossing all zones), costing about $180. Given the cost of owning and operating a car to accomplish the same, public transit seems to be a reasonable alternative. For a low income person, the heavily subsidized bus/train system is a significant benefit. A car would be quite a bit more to pay for when considering payment, gas, insurance and possible repairs sot he $90/month strikes me as sustainable. It is certainly not as convenient but being a regular public transit commuter, I can see how it is usable if planned out properly. I do feel that a better fare structure would be both easier to use and lessen the sometimes confusing process of knowing what to pay. In a time of government health care and free Obama phones, it seems as if a great many people are averse paying for anything.

    The quote about being cheaper to drive is misleading as it is only one snapshot in time and does not accurately reflect the long term costs of vehicle ownership.

    1. Your conclusion assumes that the cost of owning a car stops when the owner takes a subsidized ride. It doesn’t. Most costs are calendar, not mileage based. The commenter is correct, the cost of driving is cheaper, but, the cost of parking exceeds the cost of fuel and needs to be considered. The additional time spent to take RTD also needs to be considered.

      1. I was looking at it as if one did not own a car and strictly used mass transit. The additional time is significant and is an absolute detriment to riding the bus.

    2. It’s not so much about being expensive as being bad value for the money. The only sure thing about a fare increase is that it causes fewer people to ride. RTD isn’t anywhere near its operating capacity. As such, it shouldn’t think about fare increases. When the day comes that I have to stand on a bus or train, it might be time to think about raising fares. Another way to generate more revenue is increasing ridership and/or monthly pass holders. The only way to do that is if they represent good value for the money. The passes don’t currently represent good value for the money. When comparing cars (apples) and busses (oranges) remember a car leaves on time every time, gets to the destination in 1/2 to 1/3 the time, and can be used by anyone in your family who has a license. An EcoPass will (can?) never replace a car, but RTD should still try.

  5. If you’re just counting the gas cost, you might think it’s cheaper. But consider also wear and tear on the car & costs of parking, and it starts to add up. I don’t mind paying something to let someone else do the driving, and I can get around downtown in the free shuttles. Gas prices are way down now, but the next time they get up to $4.75 a gallon, you might see the advantage to mass transit.

  7. Fares are totally unfair- to home owners, and to everyone who buys most anything. Why should we pay so others can get a cheap ride into Denver? So the City fathers can bask in the glory of Denver being a world class debt ridden city? RTD should be pay as you go. If the Rich people down south want to ride the rail into Denver, they should pay the full cost. not take money from homeowners and the poor of the area to pay the difference!

    1. Yeah yeah yeah, and paying property taxes to support roads is unfair to bicycle owners. Federal taxes for highways are unfair to people who fly. It’s unfair to use my taxes for schools since I don’t have kids. It’s unfair to use my taxes for fire departments since my house has never caught on fire. It’s unfair to use my taxes on the police since I live in a nice neighborhood. Welcome to life outside a monastery.

Comments are closed.