Fare evasion by Metro customers and evasive plans of County leaders

Earlier this month King County released a report on Metro’s bus fare enforcement program: https://mkcclegisearch.kingcounty.gov/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=7686164&GUID=CE8C747C-5EB0-41F5-9D68-F650382AE090&Options=Advanced&Search=

The report revealed that over the last eight months of 2025 Metro’s enforcement officers had issued only eight citations for non-payment of bus fare and none of the individuals cited actually paid the fine associated with the infraction.

It would be wonderful if out of fifty million boardings only eight passengers failed to pay their fare. However, Metro estimates that over a third of passengers are failing to pay, which means no fare is collected from millions of boardings per year  The Metro fare enforcement officers have worked thousands of hours but their efforts do not appear to have resulted in increased compliance. This calls into question the effectiveness of the fare enforcement program, which costs over $3 million per year. It also suggests that fare evasion is costing Metro around $35 million per year in lost revenue.

It is tempting to assume fare evasion is largely due to teenagers, but the “Move Ahead Washington” legislation passed in 2022 has allowed students (18 and under) to ride fare-free, so kids aren’t to blame for the extensive fare evasion problem.

Homeless individuals have been known to avoid paying transit fares, and the King County report says four of the eight individuals cited for non-payment gave no phone number and two indicated their residence was a homeless shelter. This suggests the County’s unhoused population may be more likely to evade fare payment, but that cannot explain the millions of boardings where fares weren’t paid. Clearly, the problem goes deeper.    

Fare enforcement is not a new problem, but since the onset of the COVID pandemic it has gotten much worse. In 2010 Metro estimated the fare evasion rate was about 4.8%. At the time that was considered a serious matter and recommendations were made to step up fare collection. But when COVID hit in 2020 Metro suspended fare enforcement altogether. Now Metro is struggling to enforce fare payment among customers who have become accustomed to not paying, and they are discovering that once people have been given something for free it is hard to get them to pay.

Media attention has focused on the meager number of citations that have been issued and the failure to collect fines from any of the freeloaders. That aspect of the story obscures the more consequential issues and the larger implications for transit in King County.

The table below shows what has occurred with Metro’s farebox revenue, ridership, and operating costs.

In 2024 Metro ridership was about 30% below the pre-COVID level. That decrease, a loss of more than thirty million annual riders, is the bigger issue the County Council needs to address. The decrease in ridership is costing Metro about as much as they lose from fare evasion.

Lower ridership and fare evasion is also increasing the operating subsidy. In 2024 fare revenue covered only 8.3% of bus operating costs, down from 23.3% in 2019. Prior to the COVID pandemic the County Council’s adopted target called for fare revenue to cover 25% of operating expenses. Recently that target was lowered to just 10% with a goal of 15%. Moving the goal posts doesn’t solve the underlying problems of rising costs and below-forecast ridership.

The shrinking farebox recovery ratio problem is not just the result of fare evasion and falling ridership. Rising operating costs, which have increased by more than 30% since 2019, have widened the gap between fare revenue and hourly operating expenses. These trends are disastrous for Metro’s long-range financial plan.

Once upon a time fare collection was simple, passengers paid when they boarded the bus, either by putting cash in the farebox, showing the driver a valid pass, or presenting a transfer. In an effort to expedite loading and minimize dwell time at stops, Metro has been transitioning to off-board payment at kiosks. While that facilitates fare payment and allows boarding at both doors, it also makes fare enforcement more difficult.

In response to the findings in the Fare Enforcement Report Metro has indicated they will conduct a survey of riders “to better understand the reasons for fare non-payment by customers”. I can hardly wait.

As noted above, the steep reduction in fare revenue raises a number of issues for Metro. Last September the County Council increased the base fare from $2.75 to $3.00. That may slightly increase revenue from those who willingly pay their fare, but it does nothing to address the fare evasion problem. The County Council has also been thinking in terms of putting a tax increase on the ballot. That could help off-set the loss of fare revenue, but voters might wonder why they should pay higher sales tax to provide service for people who aren’t willing to pay the already heavily subsidized fare.

Before putting a tax increase on the ballot the County Council and County Executive would be well advised to take a hard look at Metro’s unsustainable trend in operating costs. That analysis should be part of a more extensive re-think of how transit service can be efficiently provided to the 2.3 million county residents spread across the county’s 2,300 square mile area. The challenge is not only to enforce fare payment, even more important is figuring out what service people will use and are willing to pay for.