Free fares appear to be a hard sell for Houston area transit officials, who said while they are open to exploring discounts, people boarding buses and trains will need to fork over $1.25 for the foreseeable future.

After a comprehensive analysis by Metropolitan Transit Authority staff, transit board members said removing fares from the system actually would increase agency costs by creating a need for more buses and operators, potentially to the tune of $170.6 million annually.

“It is just not feasible to do free fares,” Metro board member Jim Robinson said, echoing others on the board and in the transit agency.

Proponents argue transit use would skyrocket and reduce overall traffic volumes if transit was free. Riding also would be easier, they say, because buses and trains could open front and rear doors for boarding without the need for users to stop and pay fares.

PAYMENT ON HOLD: Metro delays new system contract to consider free fare options

Metro’s analysis concluded that ridership would jump from 86 million trips a year to an estimated 117 million if fares were eliminated altogether. Even offering free rides only during peak hours could boost ridership to around 100 million, the study found.

Those new riders, however, would come at a big cost, said Julie Fernandez, the transit agency’s lead management analyst. To handle the demand, Metro would need nearly 500 more vehicles, mostly buses, and 415 new operators. Such a sizable jump in vehicles and employees would require the agency to build a new bus operating facility to complement the existing six bus depots.

Even preparing the transit system for free rides would take four years, Fernandez said, adding, “it takes time to order new buses.”

The cost of going free prompted many Metro board officials to conclude it was not likely.

“It is easy to look at it and say ‘OK, it is such a small part of our budget’ but it is really more complicated than that,” Metro Chairwoman Carrin Patman said.

Metro derives about $70 million a year from fares. Its annual operating budget is around $700 million.

Tory Gattis, a local blogger who often writes about Metro and urban issues, and Harris County Precinct 3 Commissioner Steve Radack recently urged transit officials to reduce or remove fares.

“People respond to free,” Gattis said.

He said Metro’s analysis was thorough, including higher estimated costs for providing security, though he remained interested in attempts to lower costs, particularly for commuters.

FUTURE OF TRANSIT: Metro officials savor win, start work on $3.5B plan for buses and trains

Board members said they were open to some options, such as free trips for schoolchildren, though even those would require additional analysis. Fernandez said school districts, for example, could change their own bus offerings if Metro went free, something that would need to be factored into how it affects transit ridership.

Despite the benefits of increased ridership, many of those urging Metro to expand service oppose the elimination of fares.

“When people don’t pay for something, there’s no value to it,” Oni Blair, executive director of LINK Houston, told Metro board members in December.

LINK works with low-income and minority communities to increase transit offerings, something Blair said could be stunted if Metro were to give up the roughly $70 million in annual fare revenues. Such a move also could delay efforts to expand service or add routes long-sought by some voters that overwhelmingly supported Metro’s $3.5 billion transit plan in November.

“Metro will risk the overwhelming support you have earned,” Blair said.

Houston is not alone in talking about free fares. Kansas City, Mo., recently eliminated all fares on its transit system, with the city picking up the cost. Kansas City, however, has a daily bus ridership one-seventh of what Metro carries on its buses and trains each day.

“Their ridership has gone down 20 percent in the last five years,” Fernandez said of Kansas City. Metro’s ridership over the past five years has increased 7 percent, but still remains below ridership in 2006 and 2007.

MORE LANES, SAME ISSUES: Grand Parkway debate comes east with construction

The agency, with a base fare of $1.25, already has one of the lowest fares among major transit agencies, and offers numerous discounts for elderly riders and the disabled. Q card users receive five free trips every 50 rides.

In other cities, offering free rides has resulted in an uptick in disruptive passengers, something Blair said led people to choose not to ride even if it was free. Transit agencies, such as those in Austin and Portland eliminated fares then had to spend more on policing the routes than they had before.

Metro already has a negative impression with some local commuters — riders and non-riders alike often complain about drug-influenced or disruptive passengers at rail and bus stops. Risking a worsening of that reputation is a factor, Robinson said.

“There are a lot of women who will not ride the rail because they think it is unsafe,” he said.

Wednesday’s discussion by Metro’s finance and audit subcommittee is not the final word on waiving fares, Patman said. Staff still is studying other options, such as offering K-12 students free trips, and wants public feedback before moving ahead with any proposals or the agency’s plan to spend nearly $100 million on new fare collection systems on buses and train platforms.

Even though it is unlikely fares will end, Patman cheered the discussion.

“It is an excellent exercise,” Patman said. “Every so often, we should think about this.”

dug.begley@chron.com