Read our Report
In July 2025, we released A Metro Worth Paying For. This report documents LA Metro's abandonment of fare enforcement, and our proposal for how Metro leadership can reverse course.
A Metro Worth Paying For marked the beginning of our campaign and since then, we have remained committed to adapting our research and messaging as we learn new information. As part of this commitment, we have taken the radical step of including a corrections log in our report.
If you have feedback, questions or corrections for any of our campaign materials, please reach out to ametroworthpayingfor@gmail.com.
A Metro Worth Paying For.pdfRecommendations
These five recommendations were originally proposed in our July 2025 report, linked above.
Recommendation A:
Short Term: Begin random, onboard proof-of-payment inspections across the rail network and G Line.
The rail system and G Line already officially require proof of payment and have the required infrastructure. All that’s missing is the enforcement. With 200 full-time TSOs, Metro has roughly 1,000 daily patrol hours available to deploy system-wide (assuming 35 patrol hours per week per TSO). There are roughly 6.3 million monthly boardings across the rail system and G Line. Assuming each TSO can validate 20 TAP cards an hour, riders will have a 9.6% chance of a fare check every time they ride. This means there is a 90% chance of getting checked after just 23 rides. This will massively lower fare evasion if implemented correctly.
Keys for Success:
1. Fare Enforcement First: To achieve actual deterrence, riders need to know there’s a high likelihood they will have their TAP card checked after entering the system. To achieve this, Metro should set explicit card inspection targets. TSOs should transition to enforcing fares as their primary activity, stopping only for breaks or if they witness a crime or Code of Conduct violation. As explained above, fare enforcement will not distract TSOs from their role protecting riders from crime. Instead, it will enhance their crime fighting ability, since officers are more likely to encounter crimes and Code of Conduct violations while patrolling the system enforcing fares.
2. Everywhere All the Time: As seen during the TAP-to-Exit pilot, fare enforcement only works when and where it takes place. If TSOs stop checking fares at 8pm, fare evasion will skyrocket after 8pm. If TSOs never venture out to the C Line, fare evasion will be dramatically higher on the C Line. And with fare evasion will come all the problems described above. To prevent this, TSOs should intentionally be distributed evenly across the different lines with shifts across the entirety of the service day.
3. Issue Actual Fines: Lastly, if riders are let off with warnings instead of fines, fare enforcement will fail yet again. While it's true that encountering fare enforcement in real life may come as a shock to riders, the solution is not perpetual forgiveness. Instead, warnings should be issued only in the first month before transitioning to citations, similar to Metro's recent transition to automated bus lane enforcement. Alternatively, warnings could be issued only on an individual’s first infraction.
Recommendation B:
Short Term: Begin plain clothes fare enforcement operations on Metro buses.
Currently, Metro buses are not equipped with proof-of-payment infrastructure, so there isn’t a way to do onboard inspections. However, it is possible to station TSOs onboard in plain clothes where they can intercept fare evaders. As with the onboard inspections, Metro can start by issuing warnings before transitioning to citations. If this strategy seems heavy handed, remember that uniformed TSOs would be clearly visible to prospective fare evaders entering the bus, allowing them to only pay in those rare instances. But if the TSOs are initially unidentified, riders will have no choice but to pay every time just in case. This is currently the only way to effectively create deterrence against fare evasion on buses, which make up a majority of Metro’s ridership. That's why major agencies like MTA, WMATA and TTC have employed this exact strategy.
Recommendation C:
Short Term: Install overreach barriers on the emergency gates.
Immediately after installing the first two high-paddle gates at Lake and Firestone, Metro officials noticed that fare evaders were simply reaching over the fire escape gate and opening it from inside. In an April 2025 interview with Mass Transit Magazine, LA Metro’s Deputy Chief of System Security and Law Enforcement Robert Gummer acknowledged the issue and said Metro would look at raising the height of fire exits. There's no need to delay. Let's start installing these barriers right away so the new high gates are useful from day one.
Recommendation D:
Medium Term: Install receipt printers on buses and begin onboard fare inspections.
Metro will eventually need to transition to a proof-of-payment system onboard all buses. Those paying in cash would be issued proof-of-payment receipts and retain them for the duration of their journey. This will allow Metro to begin conducting random onboard fare inspections just like on the rail system and G Line.
Recommendation E:
Medium Term: Adjust fares to inflation
As discussed above, Metro’s fares haven't been adjusted for inflation since 2014, when $1.75 was worth $2.40 in today’s money. The LIFE program now protects low-income riders from fare increases, allowing Metro to inflation-adjust fares back to 2014 levels. We recommend that once Metro is able to reestablish fare compliance, Metro leadership looks at raising the fares to $2.25 or $2.50. (Metro should also raise the weekly fare cap from $5 to $7 and monthly fare cap from $18 to $23 or $26.) While there will be pushback, we believe riders will be more supportive of this long-overdue inflation adjustment if they can finally trust that other riders are also pitching in.