Popular wisdom chiefly blames low transit ridership on sprawl and too few rail stations. Fortunately, SB79 passed and will densify San Diego. Disappointingly, voters rejected Measure G’s rail expansion program.
But neither addressed the Metropolitan Transit System’s operating deficit and ensuing service cuts. Only 12%, or $42 million, of Measure G’s revenue would have funded transit operations — paltry compared to MTS’ impending $136 million yearly operating deficit.
MTS needs more money
When discussing MTS’ operating deficits, many retort, “Who cares? Transit should not be profitable!”
I agree MTS does not need to be profitable, or have passenger fares exceed operating expenses. However, in replying to a public records request, MTS noted it must “completely close a real operating deficit” because “unlike the federal government’s ability to run on a deficit, local agencies like MTS must pay each of their bills as they come due.”
Pre-COVID, like every other major American transit agency, MTS was not profitable. Fare revenues covered only 34% of MTS’ operating costs. But MTS had zero deficit, because subsidy revenue from taxes completely covered the remaining operating expenses.
However, post-COVID inflation has escalated expenses above revenues, creating a recurring, yearly deficit, despite both MTS buses and trolleys consistently being highly cost-effective. The National Transit Database’s 2024 Metrics show MTS’ trolley as having the lowest per-passenger operating cost and subsidy among all 23 American light rail systems.
MTS’ recent decision to freeze service increases, dip into savings, and shift non-essential capital funds to operations can only close the deficits through mid-2028. Afterward, MTS’ savings will evaporate, leading to $136 million annual deficits. Thus, if MTS does not increase revenue, it must cut service, which would decimate ridership. After all, MTS riders have prioritized frequency first, for good reason.
Frequency is king
Frequency is even more crucial than density and station count in generating ridership.
In 2019, Calgary’s CTrain light rail carried 91.6 million trips on 37.2 track miles, translating to a per-mile ridership over twice that of Bay Area Rapid Transit, and nearly twice that of Muni Metro Light Rail. Those two systems center on downtown San Francisco, an employment hub far denser and bigger than downtown Calgary. Gas, parking, and tolls are also more expensive in San Francisco than Calgary, which has zero tolls.
Yet Calgary’s CTrain achieves superior ridership because of greater frequency. Peak hour frequency on individual CTrain lines was five minutes, compared to 15 minutes on individual BART lines.
Toronto’s subway and Chicago’s “L” both serve areas with comparable population and density. But Toronto’s subway achieved a weekday 2025 ridership over double of Chicago’s L over only half as many stations. Superior frequency propelled Toronto’s success. During weekdays, each Toronto subway line ran every 2-6 minutes, compared to 4-10 minutes on Chicago’s L, and 15 minutes on most San Diego trolley lines.
Closing the deficit
To increase revenue, MTS began enforcing $25 fines for fare evasion in February 2025, which halved trolley fare evasion rates from 26% to 12%. However, the impact on bus fare evasion rates — which have consistently remained around only 3% — was negligible. MTS is also raising fares, since riders across all income levels prefer maintained service and higher fares over no fare hikes but reduced service. But even lowering trolley fare evasion rates to under 3% and hiking fares will increase annual revenues by only $13 million and $4.6 million to $14 million, respectively.
More robust funding must come from subsidies. Unfortunately, the Federal Transit Administration funds only capital projects while giving virtually zero operating dollars to larger transit agencies like MTS aside from one-time COVID-era emergency funds. Thus, the county and state must increase operations funding.
The most realistic solution is expanding the Transit Development Act, which would raise MTS’ annual revenue by $140 million. It would require only the Governor and Legislature’s blessing, with no voter approval necessary.
Putting a revived Measure G on the ballot with triple the transit operations funding percentage of 2024’s Measure G is tempting. However, this November, California voters will likely approve an “Save Proposition 13 Act”, which will raise the threshold for citizen’s initiatives like Measure G from a simple majority to two-thirds.
More attainable would be an MTS-led half-cent sales tax measure to raise $300 million annually in revenue. The California Transit Association has pursued legislation to drop the threshold for transit-agency led tax measures from two-thirds to 55%.
Whatever the solution, the crisis is clear. MTS, despite its cost-effectiveness, is barreling toward annual deficits due to inflation and state and local government inaction. Building new rail lines is exciting. But there will be zero money to run newly-built lines if MTS does not even have money to maintain already-poor frequency on existing lines.
Alex Wong is a data researcher with RideSD, a nonprofit that promotes mass transit in San Diego.
Hence then, the article about opinion the biggest threat to san diego transit is multi million dollar deficits was published today ( ) and is available on Times of San Diego ( Middle East ) The editorial team at PressBee has edited and verified it, and it may have been modified, fully republished, or quoted. You can read and follow the updates of this news or article from its original source.
Read More Details
Finally We wish PressBee provided you with enough information of ( Opinion: The biggest threat to San Diego transit is multi-million-dollar deficits )
Also on site :