ALERT! : More info
Translink Buzzer Blog

Pre-paid fares increase on April 1

Pre-paid fare increases taking effect on April 1, 2010. Click for a much larger version!

Pre-paid fare increases taking effect on April 1, 2010. Click for a much larger version!

Well, there’s no easy way to say this, but the cost of most pre-paid fares will go up as of April 1, 2010.

I say “pre-paid fares” because single cash fares will stay the same. Increases will only be on pre-paid fares like FareCard monthly passes, FareSaver tickets, Employer Passes and more. (DayPasses won’t be increased though.)

You may have already seen the ads in the newspapers (or noticed when you bought your pass for April), but here’s a chart at right also showing the new costs for passes as of April 1.

West Coast Express will also see fare increases which aren’t in the chart — see this PDF for those fare changes.

This must come as small comfort, but the reason we are increasing fares is to pay for the expanded service we have put in place since 2004. The increase in fares is expected to bring in an additional $18 million per year in revenue.

A couple of things to bear in mind

If you have unused FareSaver tickets purchased at the pre-April 1 price, you won’t be required to pay an additional amount after April 1.

Remember that your monthly FareCards are tax-deductible, too!

For more info, you might also be interested in the TransLink Commissioner’s report on these fare increases and his reasons for approving them. His “Order 10-01” on the page includes a great deal of background.

And here is the press release we put out about the pre-paid fare increase. It includes this note:

Even with the reduced discount, the price of pre-paid fare media is still a considerable savings over single-ride tickets. For example, a regular workday commute between Surrey and downtown Vancouver would cost $200 per month using single cash fares – 40 trips at $5 each way. With the Monthly FareCard, the break-even point comes at 30 trips, and since monthly FareCards are good any time, the economy increases every time a FareCard is used.

This break-even point is around the middle of the pack among major Canadian transit systems: passes in Toronto start paying for themselves at 40 trips and 33 in Victoria; Ottawa and Montréal have a shorter break-even period (27 and 25, respectively).


  • By ericmk, March 23, 2010 @ 8:19 pm

    Fair increases!? Oh no! Actually, it’s not that big of a deal as the post mentions, monthly farecards still save you money! I haven’t noticed any changes in service, but is Translink considering service cuts to further balance its budget? Or are the fare increases enough?

  • By ericmk, March 23, 2010 @ 8:21 pm

    Opps! I meant fare increases, not fair increases, but I suppose that would be nice distraction from the fare increases! ;)

  • By David W Lemley, March 23, 2010 @ 8:23 pm

    Is this an April Fool’s joke? Like at 12:01pm on April first you’re going to be all like HA HA Vancouver! We Fooled You! If not, you guys must really hate your customers, and not want to increase ridership. Seriously, $110 for a 2 zone pass? What the hell man! I’m on a fixed budget as is, I can’t afford half my bills, but I need a bus pass to get to work….but I can’t afford that. Thanks TransLink…

  • By Chris, March 23, 2010 @ 9:24 pm


  • By Scott, March 23, 2010 @ 9:53 pm

    I understand why Translink needs to increase the price of these fares, but for people like myself South of the Fraser, we are paying a lot more over the years for service that is terrible compared to places like Burnaby and Vancouver. HUGE areas of Surrey don’t have bus service at all or they don’t have service past 9pm. If we are to pay more and more SOTF then we should receive better service aka the 399 and 531. Cut service in areas like Burnaby and Vancouver and routes that aren’t utilized fully. For example there are lots of 130’s and 19’s at night that run often and hardly ever have passengers.

  • By Tsushima Masaki, March 24, 2010 @ 12:16 am

    Of course this isn’t going to be a popular piece of news but I think the timing is just horrible too. Vancouver reverts back to its “normal” service levels after the Winter Games and then there appears the hike in fares?

  • By Paul, March 24, 2010 @ 2:57 am

    The big benefit to the monthly pass vs everything else. Is you can claim it on your income taxes. While it only give you 15% back. That is still better then nothing.

  • By TheWorkingPoor, March 24, 2010 @ 7:23 am

    This the time to be thinking about supporting your local labour union if you want to see your salaries to increase against tax and living expense increases.

  • By Ric, March 24, 2010 @ 10:54 am

    Not another fare increase. Horrible time, not right after the olympics when the service has been reverted back to normal levels. I use the system everyday $81 for a 1 zone monthly fare card is TOO EXPENSIVE WITHOUT SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS. NO FARE INCREASE WITHOUT OLYMPIC SERVICE LEVEL (SERVICE IMPROVEMENTS).

    Although I did purchase the Olympic transit pass at the price of $110, this was a special pass and was also just a once in a life time thing. We wouldn’t be seeing anymore of these passes anymore. This was also a collector souvenir transit pass, and the pass was also valid for a longer period.

    It doesn’t make sense to that they are only raising the cost of Pre-paid fares and not the cash fares. Why aren’t the cash fares and the price of the day pass being raised? Is the price of the FastTrax going up too?

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 24, 2010 @ 1:04 pm

    Well, this fare increase is a bit weird to explain or comprehend, because the extra funding not paying for expansion of service going forward — this fare increase is to cover all the service expansions we made since 2004. In other words, it helps pay for all the hundreds of new buses, the 48 new SkyTrain cars, and extra routes like the #33 that we’ve brought on since then.

    We have been trying to bring this to the forefront in all our public consultations since 2004. We knew that the region and our board of mayors wanted expansion, and the choice was made then to expand, and to fundraise for this expansion on an ongoing basis. Our financial team worked to build up surplus reserves, a type of big savings account that we could draw on to fund the ongoing expansion. But those reserves have been heavily drawn down by 2010, and so now more funding is needed to pay for the growth and sustain it in our existing system.

    Hence the fare increase — and you have to bear in mind that we have limited sources of funding that we can actively use to get more money for the system. Fares, property taxes, and fuel tax are some of our major financial contributors. (Here is a list of our major funding sources, and for the future, we’d like to try exploring new funding sources. Here are some more future funding sources we might try. All would need your support though!)

    You might take a look at the 2010 10-Year Plan consultation from last year, and you’ll see this ongoing 2004 revenue issue referenced in the documentation. (It was also in newspaper ads and such but those documents aren’t online.) Here’s a quote from page 54 of the plan:

    The need for significant additional revenues to sustain the transportation system has been known since the time that TransLink’s Ten Year Outlook to 2013 was prepared in 2004. Projections to 2013 provided in the 2008 Plan indicated that without new, sustained revenue sources, TransLink would incur annual deficits and consume its cumulative surplus by 2012.

    I also wrote a post in 2008 to explain this issue. And the Be Part of the Plan consultation from last year also explored customer responses about fare increases.

    As far as I know, the choice was made to only raise prepaid fares, since they have not been increased in the same proportion as cash fares over the years. The other thought was that raising cash fares would harder hit those with lower incomes, who could not afford to buy longer-term passes on a regular basis.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 24, 2010 @ 1:13 pm

    Absolutely — you guys do pay a lot and we know south of Fraser service needs to be better. I know it is something we are absolutely working on, and that’s why services like the 399 were planned. However, the funding decision made by the mayors and our board last year was to keep our current system afloat, and work on funds for expansion ongoing. We’re working on it, and I hope you can bear with us as we keep trying to push Surrey service forward!

  • By Steve, March 24, 2010 @ 1:25 pm

    My feedback to Translink would be:

    I am not adverse to prices going up, that’s life, I charge more now than I did in 2008. If I only travel weekdays to and from work the saving is quite considerable even with the fare rise, in reality I also use the service at the weekend giving me a greater saving. Generally the service is good, reliable, very few delays, clean and most staff extraordinarily helpful & jolly.

    I am not keen on prices going up higher than the rate of inflation, this is considerably more. Commuters weren’t given enough notice about the rise. A rise at the tail end of a recession is not welcome. I’d like to see Translink do more about fare evasion and the collection of fines. I would also expect Translink to address overcrowding issues. To match other cities Translink should be more creative about advertising space as a form of income generation.

  • By Paul, March 24, 2010 @ 1:40 pm

    They could of kept the fares at the lower rate and not raised the fuel tax and property taxes. But then you would have seen a massive drop in service.

    This allows them to maintain the service level that is currently there.

    Although personally I was hoping the mayors would have gone for the 450 Mil option back in October. That way you would have seen increased service with the increase in fares etc..

  • By WL, March 24, 2010 @ 4:27 pm

    For those who haven’t heard… News1130 is reporting a protest is planned at the Main Street Station at 5pm for Friday. It’s unclear how transit service will be disrupted.

    I think the BS union is out of touch…. it should be held in Coquitlam.

    Just realized Critical Mass is also this Friday…. Time to get the car keys.

  • By Cliff, March 24, 2010 @ 6:04 pm

    As a vehicle driver, I am actually quite fine with additional levies on gas and tolls. They tax those who use the roads in an even and unbiased manner. (Then again, I only fill up in the USA so the fuel taxes have very little effect on me here).

    The problem with transit is that it feels like TransLink doesn’t get it. We need park and rides in the suburbs. Open that empty lot by Braid Station to cars. You don’t even have to pave it!

    We had a few park and rides that were closed, but I’m not really lamenting the loss of them because they were in the wrong locations or simply places too close to Vancouver to be of any use.

    I like Marine Drive Station. I can park for free just metres away from the station and ride into town.

    The nearest SkyTrain station to me is actually 22nd Street Station but it’s not friendly to those living a couple km from it. Most SkyTrain Stations aren’t.

    I would be more persuaded to use transit and go a little out of the way to use it if my insurance premiums gave me a transit pass. I remember this idea being thrown about a couple years ago. I would have loved a U-Pass option for those with cars.

    I really hope more of these mega-projects get pushed through. Maybe with increased taxes we won’t have to rely on P3s. (Not awful, but not as desirable as owning a project outright).

  • By Chris, March 24, 2010 @ 7:17 pm

    I’m fully in support of a congestion charge, road levies, and a vehicle registration tax to pay for increased transit services.

  • By -.-, March 24, 2010 @ 8:48 pm

    Is it a April Fools Joke??? If it is are you going to say is isn’t true at 12:01pm on April 1st?

  • By Paul, March 25, 2010 @ 1:34 am


    Ok either the bus riders union live on another planet or else they are just plain stupid.

    Anyone who is a transit user and had paid attention to the news last fall around october. Would have known about this fare increase coming up. As it was announced back then.

    Also if they were smart they wouldn’t protest the fare increase. But would protest against the Provincial government. To allow translink any revenue source it feels it needs without the provincial government sticking its hands where they don’t belong. Case in point the parking levy was dropped because the provincial government didn’t want it.

  • By Robert, March 25, 2010 @ 8:54 am

    It will be interesting to see what ‘reforms’ the provincial government will announce for Translink in the weeks (months?) ahead. Though I don’t think the Buzzer blog nor Jhenifer need reforms; they are already A+. :-)

  • By Heidi, March 25, 2010 @ 11:48 am

    Not sure how to do the quote code, but:

    “The other thought was that raising cash fares would harder hit those with lower incomes, who could not afford to buy longer-term passes on a regular basis.”

    This makes no sense to me. If you are on a lower income, wouldn’t you be SURE to buy the pass to save money (I know I do)? What other option is Translink suggesting those people have? Paying cash fares occasionally when they have the the money and walking the rest of the time? I would need to do some research in order to agree with the justification that fare cards haven’t been subject to the same increase as cash fare, but at least that sounds somewhat plausible. The reasoning that those paying cash fares have less money to buy passes is very weak, in my opinion, especially when you consider the amount of fare evasion where no cash fares are being paid at all, and oftentimes drivers are making additional pick-ups and drop-offs (i.e., extra gas usage) for these passengers (who contribute to overcrowding).

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 12:29 pm

    Btw: for those who have asked, April 1 was chosen for the increase because it was the start of the first full month past the Olympic period. Not because of April Fools’ Day!

  • By Ric, March 25, 2010 @ 12:50 pm

    Is the price of the FastTrax going up too?

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 1:17 pm


    Good point. I may certainly have that part wrong about low-income riders. I had thought that one of my colleagues in media relations had said that to a media outlet, but I can’t seem to find the reference now. So: your point is well taken!

  • By Sean (CMBC), March 25, 2010 @ 3:02 pm

    RE FASTTRAX: I believe the provincial government announced recently of a province wide U-Pass, or similar pass, due in September which should rfeplace the FastTrax sticker…
    Hopefully the cost of U-Pass will be the same as the Concession monthly pass price…

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 3:05 pm

    Ric: FastTrax isn’t going up, as far as I know.

  • By Heidi, March 25, 2010 @ 3:25 pm

    Thanks for the response, Jhenifer. You’re right; I believe I saw Drew Snider on TV yesterday giving a quote to that effect. It confused me then, too.

    I do appreciate you hosting an arena to discuss this. I had sent an email to the RTC about this when they were seeking public feedback on the increase, hoping to hear a rationale as to why regular riders are the ones being “penalized,” but I haven’t come across anything yet. Do you have any information on fare increases over the past few years that corroborates the statement about the disproportionate increases between cash and prepaid fares?

  • By zack, March 25, 2010 @ 6:52 pm

    I’m confused with the unequal increases of the prepaid fares.
    1 zone pass Old $73 New $81
    $8 increase
    2 zone pass Old $99 New $110
    $11 increase
    3 zone pass Old $136 New $151
    $15 increase

    I usually don’t mine paying more if it means increasing service or upgrading the transit system, but paying more while getting the same service just seems absurd. And now since TransLink so far has adopted the $130 million model to keep it’s current system afloat, I’m wondering; does that put in jeopardy on the future projects on hold such as the UBC and Expo line SkyTrain extensions. And despite the belt-tightening budget, will TransLink be able negotiate a deal with the province and the City of Vancouver for the proposed streetcar line to Stanley Park?

    Btw, the FastTrax pass is also going up the same price as a 1-zone pass according the commissioner’s website.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 6:58 pm

    zack: Thanks for the correction on FastTrax.

    Well, I’m not really sure how to explain it beyond what I’ve got above — the increased fares are meant to pay for past expansion, and not expansion going forward.

    I don’t think the UBC & Expo Line extensions and similar are necessarily in jeopardy though. Bear in mind that those are project that happen over the span of many years — we are just in an early year of development for those projects, and you don’t necessarily need a ton of money at this stage to do studies and evaluations of the land and technology. The other thing that should be comforting is that the province and mayors are both in agreement that more funding needs to be found for transit and that more transit is needed — which means they seem quite intent on finding some kind of funding for it, even though we don’t know at this very moment what that funding might be.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 7:05 pm


    One more thing: the FareCard prices all went up about 11%. So the actual dollar amount might vary but the percentage is the same.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 25, 2010 @ 7:27 pm


    Just for you, here is an Excel sheet with fare data going back to 1993, including the percentage increases. I think you’ll find it shows the increases have been larger for cash fares. I have verified it as best I can using old Buzzers and am just about 99% sure all the numbers are correct. In the early 1990s, our service area reached its present size by extending to Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows so these fares are all a fair comparison to each other.

  • By ;-), March 25, 2010 @ 7:33 pm

    You should look at the prices going back to the 1970’s…. I think fares were 25 cents!

  • By ;-), March 25, 2010 @ 7:40 pm

    Thanks Sean for bringing up the U-Pass.

    Looking at the U-Pass FAQ…

    I can see the U-Pass are student funded depending on the institution. Some institutions don’t like to fund transit and have opted out of the program.

    When the U-Passes are going province wide. Does this mean student fees will be going up Province wide? Or will U-Passes be funded by all taxpayers?

  • By Paul, March 26, 2010 @ 1:17 am


    The price for the Fasttrax sticker is not going up. Of course what is going up is the price of the 1 zone pass. Which you need to have with the Fasttrax sticker.

  • By Dave 2, March 26, 2010 @ 10:48 am

    There was a large protest campaign in the late ’70s when the fare went from 35 to 50 cents. Stickers from that protest lingered on for years…

  • By zack, March 26, 2010 @ 11:23 am

    Paul: Actually the FastTrax is going up, you can check the following link to see what I mean.

  • By Amy, March 26, 2010 @ 12:30 pm

    I’m disappointed in the timing – during the Olympics there was such a push to get Metro-Vancouverites onto transit, and due to lots of different circumstances, vehicle traffic actually reduced! Probably new people on transit, and then… just as you think you’d have momentum, a fare increase. :-(

  • By Heidi, March 26, 2010 @ 3:07 pm

    Wow! Thank you, Jhenifer, for taking the time to do that. I hope it wasn’t too much trouble to compile. When I hear statements like that repeated in media releases and interviews, I like to be able to see the information to back it up. You do a great job with the blog and responding to questions.

  • By Reva, March 26, 2010 @ 5:04 pm

    Great job on the chart Jhenifer, it’s interesting to see all those figures in one place and how they’ve changed over the years. However I should point out that the 1993-2000 price of the adult 2-zone farecard was $78 and the adult 3-zone farecard was $103.

    I saved a copy of the spreadsheet and added a column at the end to calculate the overall percentage increase of the price of each item from 1993-2010 — THAT’s an eye-opener!

  • By zack, March 26, 2010 @ 8:26 pm

    That’s odd I just posted a comment this morning and (POOF!) it disappeared. Is it because since it has a URL link it has to be approved first?

  • By zack, March 26, 2010 @ 8:30 pm

    Oh! I see it know. Thanks Jhen!

  • By zack, March 26, 2010 @ 8:31 pm

    Eeek!! I meant now not know.

  • By typoprone, March 27, 2010 @ 8:30 am

    “What other option is Translink suggesting those people have? Paying cash fares occasionally when they have the the money and walking the rest of the time?”

    Nope. Paying cash fares occasionally when they see that fares are being checked and evading fares the rest of the time. TransLink is encouraging fare evasion! :)

  • By WL, March 27, 2010 @ 12:32 pm

    Just saw some TV footage on the BS union at Main Street. What surprises me is where were they during the funding open house last year?

    Where does the BS union and supporters want to make the cuts if they don’t want to see fare increases?

    I’m glad to see this blog as the BS union doesn’t speak for me and those who welcome transit improvements.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 29, 2010 @ 11:07 am

    Hmmm! Well, the March 26, 1993 Buzzer lists the prices of FareCards as of April 1 to be $82 (2-zone) and $106 (3-zone). But I do know you have an extensive FareCard collection — am I mistaken on this one?

  • By zack, March 29, 2010 @ 12:24 pm

    Jhen, I posted a comment with a link to the commissioner’s website on Friday but it abruptly disappeared then came back. But somehow it vanished again, and I still can’t find the comment. Does it still need to be approved?

  • By Reva, March 29, 2010 @ 1:57 pm

    Hey Jhen, well I did assume 2 things: 1) that the prices of 1, 2, & 3-zone farecards have always been increased together on the same date; and 2) that the prices don’t decrease. If either of my assumptions are incorrect then I’m certainly inclined to go with what the Buzzer reported!

    I have 1-zone farecards from Apr.93-Oct.99 that all say $54, 2-zone ones from Jan.00-Mar.00 that say $78, and 3-zone ones for Apr. & May 00 that say $103 (I moved around a bit, lol). But I don’t actually have a 2- or 3-zone farecard from Apr.93, so I may indeed be wrong. Did they reduce the prices of 2- & 3-zone farecards at some point in there, maybe to adjust for changes in services or something? Does anyone remember? (I humbly apologise for being such a hair splitter!) Thanks. :)

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 29, 2010 @ 2:02 pm

    zack: Thanks for the heads up — I went in and found your comment and approved it. Not sure why it disappeared like that!

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 29, 2010 @ 2:03 pm

    Reva: Weird! I’m not sure if they were reduced later. I’ll take a look through the archives and see what they say.

  • By Reva, March 29, 2010 @ 2:38 pm

    Thanks Jhen — goodness knows if I knew where to find that information I’d look it up for you — you have so much else to do already — no rush! :)

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 29, 2010 @ 2:40 pm

    You could actually look it up if you wanted! All of the Buzzers from the 1990s are posted over at the main TransLink Buzzer page!

  • By Al, March 29, 2010 @ 6:38 pm

    I think the April 1 date is kind of misleading, as I went to many fare dealers today and could not find a book of 1 zone tickets – everyone said they’ll be re-stocked after the increase. My aunt asked me to buy them for her, as she lives in the Okanagan and only comes down infrequently, but takes transite the whole time. I’m not going to run around anymore – it isn’t worth it – but I’d be ticked if I was a regular faresaver user (places I tried today: IGA, Shoppers Drug Mart, London Drugs, Save on).
    Surely Translink has some mechanism for accepting / requiring returns after March 31? Like unsold magazines are returned to the wholesaler? The fellow at IGA says Translink stopped shipping faresavers after mid month.

  • By Reva, March 29, 2010 @ 10:21 pm

    Jhenifer: first of all, great Buzzer database, I had no idea! And second, AHA!

    They actually did reduce the price of 2- & 3-zone farecards Oct. 1, 1997, the same date that they did away with the midday off-peak fare period.

    Now we know! So we were both half-right, kind of! :)

  • By Paul, March 30, 2010 @ 1:07 am


    That is weird today I went to a corner store right at the Holdom Station and got the April 1 zone fare card.

    Usually I go to Safeway though. They’ve told me they get them about a week before and sell them for about a week or possibly two weeks into the month and then return what isn’t sold.

  • By Al, March 30, 2010 @ 6:43 am


    I wasn’t trying to buy a Fare Card (already bought mine, and they seemed to be available everywhere) – it’s the book of Faresaver 1 zone tickets.

    What I’m getting at is that *if* Translink stops shipping tickets early, and everyone sells out of the current rate tickets, the fare increase (and more) is essentially in effect earlier than April 1 for those who use tickets, not cards, because they are forced to use cash fares until April 1st. Which particularly sucks if you have someone coming in from the Airport.

    I wouldn’t even care if they started selling the more expensive ones already, but I suspect they aren’t allowed to do that under transit commission rules.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 30, 2010 @ 1:32 pm

    In fact this situation is actually an anomaly — with the fare change happening April 1, we have had an incredibly high demand for the FareSaver tickets. Since you can buy FareSavers at the cheaper price and they’re still valid post April 1, lots of people have been looking to stock up and are buying many more than they usually do. Our FareDealer department has been working hard to restock it, but demand has just been quite high.

  • By Al, March 30, 2010 @ 7:15 pm

    Thanks Jhenifer,
    It strikes me as a bungle / bad planning on the part of the FareDealer department.

    It would be really great if there were a central transit office where one could buy tickets (presumably all of which would be in stock at all times) instead of relying on the FareDealer network because the dealers often seem to have insufficient stock and an inconsistent re-stocking time (according to the retailers).

    To go off topic slightly, I did a quick search on the web when I was looking for in-stock tickets, and I was fairly shocked by the number of people wanting to buy / sell discounted monthly passes and longer passes. It seems like there must be a big trade in stolen passes, so I hope that Translink has been working with the Police in catching these criminals. It obviously keeps the fares going up for all of us legitimate riders (and I assume people looking to sell an April monthly pass at a discount either got it as a stolen item or it is a forgery – because they could still return it for a refund, couldn’t they?).
    Thanks again.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, March 31, 2010 @ 11:46 am

    Fantastic sleuthing, Nancy Drew! I’ll update the Excel file to reflect.

  • By Masey, March 31, 2010 @ 1:16 pm

    Here’s an idea… how about you sort out the fare jumpers and lame honesty pay system before you hike my fares tomorrow??

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, April 1, 2010 @ 3:48 pm

    We are currently working on faregates and smartcards for our system — they take a few years to develop, but we’re expecting it to be operational in 2013. Check out this post for more info.

    Fare evasion is actually a very polarizing topic. Lots of people say it is very high and we understand the frustration, as of course it’s not something we want.

    From our end, we definitely know it happens (fare evasion happens on every system!), but as far as we know, based on regular fare inspections by transit security, our fare evasion is not inordinately high. Have a look at this 2008 press release discussing an independent audit of our fare evasion evaluation process for more on that.

    So that’s where we stand right now!

  • By Paul, April 2, 2010 @ 2:11 am

    In regards to the installation of the fare gate. While it is nice. I’m actually more looking forward to the smart cards coming out. There is so much more potential with smart cards over the current system.

  • By Last351, April 2, 2010 @ 10:41 am

    Kind of like a punch in the gut after a 31 percent ridership increase during the olympics. I guess that didn’t help the bottom line at all.

  • By Jhenifer Pabillano, April 6, 2010 @ 5:28 pm

    Well, the unprecedentedly busy Olympics and the fare increase are not actually related, though the timing might make it seem that way.

    Essentially, we are seeing this fare increase now because last year, our Mayors’ Council and Board approved a plan for how TransLink would be funded in 2010. (That was what all the Be Part of the Plan consultation stuff was about.) We had a looming deficit, but the Mayors’ Council voted to increase our funding and keep the current system afloat. That increase in funding comes partly by raising fares.

    For a bit more on that decision, here’s the Buzzer blog post from October 2009, after the mayors took their vote on the plan.

Other Links to this Post

  1. Twitter Trackbacks for The Buzzer blog » Pre-paid fares increase on April 1 [] on — March 24, 2010 @ 2:27 pm

  2. The Buzzer blog » Tiny tiny adjustment for TransLink property tax rates in 2010 — March 25, 2010 @ 6:08 pm

  3. The Buzzer blog » The April Buzzer is now out! — April 2, 2010 @ 9:00 am

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a comment

Please read our Participation Guidelines before you comment.