Budget Crisis Could Force End to One-Third of Bus Routes and Less Frequent Trolleys
David Garrick at the U-T reported on a scary scenario for San Diego’s mass transit system. Garrick stated “a looming budget crisis” could “eliminate one-third of bus routes,” — and “reduce service on another one-third” and force “San Diego trolley’s four lines [to run] less frequently.”
This is certainly a doomsday outlook as Metropolitan Transit System officials attempt to deal with “annual budget deficits of $100 million to $150 million” but not until fiscal year 2030.
It’s all a “rough draft”, Garrick says. But it could “wipe out 33 of the 95 MTS bus routes….” That’s a lot of bus routes. Garrick must get his info from MTS and he reports the wipe out could include “the end of service to SeaWorld, Cabrillo National Monument, Tierrasanta and parts of Mission Hills.”
There would be notable service reductions for another 29 routes. Like, “Sunday service could be eliminated on a route or the frequency of service could be reduced from once every half an hour to once every hour.”
All four trolley lines – blue, green, orange and copper – would also see reductions in service frequency, MTS officials said. Trains now typically run every 15 minutes on most routes.
About 36% of MTS riders would experience service frequency reductions, while another 21% would lose service entirely.
21%? That’s a fifth of all MTS riders. That’s a public transit breakdown.
“The bleak scenario would be necessary despite fare increases scheduled to take effect Oct. 1. But it could be avoided if MTS gets some sort of state bailout or if local voters approve a sales tax hike devoted to transit in 2028.”
Aha! Either the state or another sales tax hike.
Garrick reports these two seemingly contradictory aspects:
One, “The service cuts would be necessary because the plan calls for eliminating 300 operators and mechanics, either through layoffs or attrition.”
And two, “A key source of the MTS budget crisis has been large pay raises the agency has given to employees in recent years.”
Now, Garrick cites MTS Chief Executive Sharon Cooney who said the pay hikes were necessary. “We really do need to pay wages that will allow people to work and live here in San Diego,” she told the MTS board.
Cooney said she remains hopeful the state will bail out MTS and other struggling transit agencies across California. Many agencies blame the pandemic for dramatically shifting commuting patterns. Cooney said allowing devastating cuts to MTS service would be a mistake.
“This is a really strong transit-mobility network that cannot fail,” she said. “It will have serious implications for the economy here in San Diego if we do fail.”
The cuts would be even worse if MTS wasn’t planning to move $50 million earmarked for capital and construction projects to operations, which would shrink the projected deficit in fiscal 2030 from $141 million to $91 million.
When members of the MTS board asked for more details on the specific routes that would be affected, MTS officials said those won’t be ready until this fall.
“This is not a proposed plan at this point,” said Brent Boyd, MTS director of scheduling and planning. “This is really just an estimation of the scale of what we’re looking at — kind of a snapshot of the possibilities.” Boyd said the exact routes and the specific reductions proposed will come soon. “We’ll be bringing back much more detailed plans in November or December — much more fleshed out,” he said.
The more detailed proposal will be presented to the public in January 2027 at workshops and then possibly approved by the board next spring, he said. Any service cuts would have to be analyzed under federal Title VI to ensure they don’t burden low-income or minority populations more than is allowed. Members of the public can provide input on possible cuts at the MTS transit shop website.
Apparently MTS officials let Garrick know that despite a fare hike coming on Oct. 1, “It’s the first fare increase in 17 years for monthly passes on local buses and the trolley. The cost of a pass will jump from $72 to $85 on Oct. 1 and then to $95 in fall 2027 — up nearly 31%. And it will be the first increase in seven years for one-way fares, which will rise from $2.50 to $3 on Oct. 1 and then to $3.25 in fall 2027. That’s a 30% hike, far steeper than the last increase in 2019 from $2.25 to $2.50.”
The hikes won’t apply to anyone enrolled in government assistance programs: CalFresh, CalWORKs or Medi-Cal. For details, visit ridepronto.com.
Providing mass transit is a responsibility of good government. If it breaks down and collapses, that’s a breakdown in government.
Fortunately, we’re not on the literal verge of a collapse, but it’s possibly not that far off. How about this: lower bus and trolley fares tremendously — see if the ridership increases dramatically — and maybe the budget crisis would be resolved, instead of the other way around.
Reduced service and increased prices are NOT going to increase ridership.
Just this morning I passed by the intersection of Mt Abernathy & Balboa Ave, a major Clairemont thoroughfare that you would expect to be an especially busy Public Transportation route as heading west takes you to the Balboa Avenue Transit Center (trolley stop). Approximately 8:45am Tuesday morning, heading west, I see three people at the bus stop on the northwest corner. Two are women, standing well away from the covered bench provided there. The third is an “unknown” – someone completely wrapped up in a dirty sleeping bag, lying on the ground next to a blue suitcase. Could have been a dead body for all you could tell. One of our many “unhoused San Diegans”.
Each time I avail of PT, usually only for Padres games, I encounter at least one of San Diego’s Finest Citizens on the trolley. My head is on a swivel due to their unpredictable behavior.
How can we expect to have strong utilization of our public transportation system if it is not safe and you cannot feel secure in riding it ? Let’s face reality – who in their right mind is taking the bus if they have a choice ? Maybe a few “civic minded” folks, trying to do their part to address “climate change”. Maybe a few for who the economics make sense (ie can’t afford $200/month to park downtown).
For public transportation to succeed, it needs to be safe, convenient and affordable. Has to be all three, not “pick any two”.
We’ve known all this for some time, yet very little has changed. So the inevitable cycle continues – raise the rates, lessen the service, face declining ridership, rinse, repeat.
“Let’s face reality – who in their right mind is taking the bus if they have a choice ?”
I do all the time, and this is despite the fact I have a vehicle. Regardless of what you see, the bus lines I take get packed.
Then,, Chris, I’d say it’s unlikely your heavily used bus routes will be eliminated. I admit this is anecdotal but I frequently see tandem buses heading up Washington St. at about two or three in the afternoon lugging fewer than ten riders. I suspect enough low ridership hours and routes can be trimmed to make a significant dent in that deficit. I am also absolutely sure that every one of those lonely riders will complain loudly that their ability to get to work or school or Grandma’s house has been inconvenienced but ridership is ridership and we have to lose the notion that everyone is owed taxpayer subsidized transportation unless it makes a little fiscal sense.
I agree with Chris’s comment above. I have been taking San Diego’s public transit for more than sixty years, have never owned a car, and held very responsible jobs. San Diego’s buses and trolleys have their pros and cons, but are a necessary or preferred mode of transportation for many of the city’s residents and tourists/visitors. You would be amazed at who rides it! Everyone from the homeless (in my observation, a very small percentage of total transit ridership) and disabled, to judges, attorneys, medical personnel, and college professors. The Blue Line trolley is packed everyday with UCSD students, and the Green Line is overflowing with SDSU students. In Point Loma, foreign students at the EF Foreign Language Campus off Midway Drive (from countries all over the world) are heavy transit riders and appear to love it! (But, then again, they are from countries where public transit borders is an essential public service.) Special events in San Diego (baseball games, ComicCon, etc.) are reminiscent of the New York City subway during rush hour! The new electric buses are extra quiet, smooth-riding, air conditioned, comfortable, and environmentally friendly. I’m so tired of people bashing San Diego Transit, especially those who rarely, if ever, ride it, yet willingly pay seven dollars for a gallon of gas.
Anyone who asks the question “Who in their right mind is taking the bus if they have a choice?” reeks of elitism. They run in small circles.
Ok Chris, you must be “out of gas” in the argument department that you have to resort to ad hominem and accuse me of being “elitist”.
Merriam Webster: “regarding other people as inferior because they lack power, wealth, or status”
I’m not even going to waste my time replying to you further as you have demonstrated clearly enough that you are not interested in serious thought or discussion. You’d rather promulgate your Squad manifesto, so go ahead.
It simply proves my point – “No one in their right mind …”
Your own words Robert were: “who in their right mind” in relation to who would take the MTS even if they have a choice. Do you at all kind of see how that would come off as elitist?
Mark – Indeed I agree there are many places where the transit lines are highly occupied and serving a very useful purpose:
Special events – no question
Students – again, no question
The rest of the time – many questions.
I’m sorry that you feel any criticism of San Diego Transit is “bashing” them. Do you feel they are doing the best job they can ? That there is no need for improvement ?
If that is the case, why are they in such dire straights ?
My point that you seem to mis-understand, is that 90% of those who had a choice between taking their own car and riding the bus/trolley are taking their car. Period.
Barring attending at a special event, I am talking about every day activities like commuting to work, like shopping for groceries, like visiting friends, like taking your kids to school.
You may have done quite well for yourself without a car for over sixty years, but there is no prize for that. I would venture that 99% of the adult population in San Diego has owned a car at some point in their life. So why do you feel that your experience is somehow representative ?
You take special exception to “especially those who rarely, if ever, ride it, yet willingly pay seven dollars for a gallon of gas”
I rarely ride it because it is inconvenient, often unclean, sometimes dangerous and generally unpleasant.
In my car, I can have a drink, I can play music without disturbing others, it is ready for me when I want to go and I go where I want to go – directly if I choose, or I can take the scenic route if it appeals to me.
I get 45 miles to the gallon in my 11 year old hybrid, so $7 gas isn’t the deterrent you might hope for.
I wonder what the gas mileage efficiency of an MTS bus with 3 passengers is ?
I observe the 43 buses between Balboa Transit Center to Kearny Mesa Transit Center, and I eyeball their bus stops as I drive around my community of Clairemont where I have lived the past 28 years. It’s a jackpot when you see a bus with more than 5 riders.
A quick glance at the schedule shows 61 round trips for #43 today.
So what’s your solution ? Raise the taxes on everybody to pay for the thing the few people use, right ?
As a lifelong and experienced transit rider, in my opinion your arguments are bogus. I ride public transit two to eight times a day, so my arguments are based on first-hand observation from INSIDE a bus or trolley. All of your arguments can be refuted, but I don’t have the time or energy to do so. True, being a dedicated transit rider can be a lifestyle choice, but it works for me and hundreds of thousands of other San Diegans. Your comment, “In my car, I can have a drink…” is hilarious…and one of the reasons I’d rather leave the driving to sober professionals, while feeling secure from drivers like you within the confines of the large steel structure of a bus!
TBF, I’m assuming he doesn’t mean an alcohol drink.
TBF, I’m assuming he doesn’t mean an alcoholic drink.
I was just having fun with him, but I don’t think he has much of a sense of humor! On the other hand…
Hmmm,
“All of your arguments can be refuted, but I don’t have the time or energy to do so.”
However, you follow with:
“I was just having fun with him”
Yeah, I get it, rebuttal requires thought.
For the record, I never drink while driving … you might spill some …
Mark – you ride the bus 8 times a day, and somehow you feel that puts you in the majority, that most people share your perspective ? I do not intend to demean your experience, but surely you must recognize it as unusual and in the extreme minority. That does not invalidate it, but it does illustrate that your experience is not “the norm”
You write – “Your comment, “In my car, I can have a drink… one of the reasons I’d rather leave the driving to sober professionals ”. However, I made no mention of alcohol whatsoever. You bias and reactionary thinking is showing
Here’s what I was referring to, MTS policy:
“Food and Drink
Eating is not allowed on buses or Trolleys
Beverages must be in spill-proof or screw-top containers”
No such restrictions in my car, so my cup of coffee (my usual beverage) is just fine and I don’t need to get a government approved container.
Your lifestyle choice works for you, no worries and no complaints. But “hundreds of thousands of other San Diegans” ? And you want to accuse me of alcoholic indulgence ?
Some fresh, but typical observations :
Tuesday Sep 22, 2026 while driving eastbound on Clairemont Mesa Blvd
5:46pm I pass a 43 eastbound which had 4 visible riders and was stopping to pick up a 5th rider at Doliva Dr
5:51pm I see a 43 westbound bus at stopped at the Convoy Ave light. 4 visible passengers
This is the usual for the 43 bus in the Clairemont Mesa area, even during “rush hour”
Once again I will point out that I am not condemning the entire MTS system as you seem to think. I recognize that it has many actively used routes and serves a useful purpose for both ridership and our City in many instances.
But it is not “The Answer” to our transportation problems. It may be one answer, but as this article points out it is obvious that it is not sustainable in its current form.
Wednesday Sep 23 8:45am – eastbound 43 bus at Clairemont Mesa Blvd and Limerick Ave, DOUBLE RIDERSHIP !!! 7 passengers
Sorry Mark and Chris, I would have to side with Robert on this topic.
San Diego was developed post-WWII and around the automobile, thus it is a city of suburbs. Mass transit (bus or trolley) is convenient only to a limited few who keep themselves within a limited radius from downtown. I would bet you dudes live in North Park or an adjacent neighborhood, that could potentially utilize mass transit without it being too much of a hassle. Although Mark riding a bus up to 8 times a day might refute that no hassle argument.
And definitely, it can be pretty scary on the trolley coming back through Mission Valley after a show at the Open Air, with packs of very sketchy people getting on and off. I know many women who would never use public transportation due to being afraid of random weird violent behavior. It exists, and it is real.
The MTS Board, which includes the mayor and three city council members, has been asleep at the wheel for many years. The only time you hear from them is when there’s a budget shortfall or when they tinker with fares.
MTS does not do a very good job of advocating on its own behalf publicly in the political arena. When the City sold SDSU the Qualcomm stadium site, MTS should have lobbied vigorously for housing to be built immediately to get the Qualcomm station back online moving people. Instead it’s been six years and counting and still no completed housing or new MTS customers.
MTS sat idly while SDSU planned and is now constructing nearly a billion dollars of student housing three quarters from SDSU’s on campus trolley station. MTS should have been advocating for that student housing be built on SDSU owned parking lots directly across the street from the campus trolley station. Now the state has passed SB79 calling for high density housing around transit stations like the one on SDSU’s campus.
MTS needs a new board of directors that doesn’t include elected officials. One of the criterias for being on the board should be that you need to ride the bus or trolley on a daily basis.
Excellent point RK.
Public transportation is a key element of any large city, yet the San Diego implementation seems more focused supporting the “visions” of elected officials who have been making a hash of our city than in serving actual transportation needs.
And as Paul Grimes notes in another comment, they have an awful lot of questionable expenditures.
Were it to be run in a business-like fashion, you can bet that the security/safety issues would be addressed toot suite !
In my first comment I pointed out how there was an inert body wrapped in a sleeping bag lying on the ground next to the bench at the bus stop on a busy intersection. Apparently no one finds that upsetting, nor even remotely unpleasant as it was conveniently ignored by the mindless “pro MTS” acolytes.
steven b also makes this point – random weird violent behavior absolutely exists and occurs on a regular basis on the trolleys. Make ’em absolutely safe and likely ridership increases.
You just kind of wonder if their money is spent wisely.
On the MTS September Consent Agenda, they are purchasing 22 paratransit buses at $222k each, $379k for whatever ultrasonic rail testing is, 3 years of uniforms for nearly a million, receiving a $1 million donation that includes a mural at 12th and Imperial, $200K for construction management, repairing 5 couplers for $193k, $8.3 million for trolley parts, $5.8 Million for bus procurement, $390k for a transit study in Otay Mesa, $2.2 million for a beautification project on Beyer Blvd, $18 million on security, $292k on a power station, $96k on sprinkler repairs at the office, $426k to have a preliminary design for an upgrade to the Kearny Mesa Transit Center. These Totals over $42 million.
There you go, Paul, getting down into the weeds of where the money goes. Just the kind of rigorous examination of facts for which you are known. The numbers put the problem into perspective.
Wow, Paul, this is great! How about putting all of that into an article for us?
MTS is a disgrace.
I live in North Park. I have my own car and occasionally use MTS for trips on the weekend due to the lack of and high cost of parking in San Diego.
For an area of the City in which high rises are built without parking and a super densely populated area, the service is…not great. Frequent trips to trolley stations are okay, but there are huge issues with MTS service.
For example, I work at the airport, approximately 6 miles away. I have a flexible work schedule. However, the quickest journey from North Park to the airport on MTS takes at least an hour and a half (!). Driving my car takes about 45 minutes now thanks to all the bike lanes that have reduced the roadways down to one lane each way with thousands of people living in a compact area.
My car is electric and costs me roughly $45 or less a month to charge. The new MTS adult passes will be $95 which makes the transit option even less desirable.
If MTS can’t build a transit line to the airport, or make a trip a few miles away from North Park convenient, how can they possibly expect to be successful? Especially in other areas of the city that are further away?
They need to better manage resources, focus on dense downtown areas and trolley lines, and the airport for goodness sake, An airport connection should have been done years ago!
Waymo is offering rides to the airport…maybe MTS should partner with them?
I’m joking of course. But there is a lack of vision, clarity, and purpose as with SANDAG and the city council. Pie in the sky solutions are offered but not enough practical solutions that would benefit most people.
I find it completely ridiculous that I public transit is not convenient to get to and from the airport. As for bike lanes, how are you planning to ride your bike with your suitcases? It’s absurd!
I will happily vote NO on any tax increases…this city as well as MTS has a spending problem, not an income problem. The example above shows there are plenty of ways to cut costs without threatening service cuts which will only reduce revenue further.
The money wasted on bike lanes would be better spent on public transportation that more people can benefit from on a daily basis.
Agree with some of your points. Have you tried the San Diego Flyer from Old Town to the airport for free? 20 min on the #10, 15 min on the Flyer, a few minutes in between.
“As for bike lanes, how are you planning to ride your bike with your suitcases? It’s absurd!”
Who TF said anything about carrying a suitcase on a bike? That’s random.
If tax increases are what’s needed then I support them. TBH I support parking meters at the beach. Sadly that won’t happen.
In all the back and forth above regarding who/how many/how usefully MTS serves our transportation needs is one thing that appears to have been forgotten. Every day our city planners and elected officials are making land use policy and development decision based upon not only transit lines that DO NOT EXIST except as lines drawn on a map and now on transit lines that are likely to be ELIMINATED.
Sorry for the shouting but this is a very real problem for all of us, whether we ride the bus/trolley system or not. Land use decisions should be made on less shaky ground than that occupied by MTS.
And don’t get me started on the airport connection. Well, since you’ve got me started I will point out that the other existing airport connection transit systems we have in California are experiencing declines in ridership. When the Oakland airport “Air Bart” connection was served by a bus the average daily ridership was 2,800. The current daily ridership is slightly more than 1,000 riders per day on the very, very expensive to build and operate people mover system. I’m not making these numbers up. More people rode the connection when it was a very inconvenient bus than the current people mover of the type that Elo-Rivera and Anderson seem so anxious for us to build. I guess they are easily distracted by shiny things.
Paul Webb – you are 100% right, shout away !
Who is not paying attention ? Golden Hill – 8 stories, 186 units, construction allowed because it is within a mile of a stop that MTS “is thinking of upgrading” to a high-frequency transit stop. Has any funding been set aside for this upgrade ? Are you kidding me ? Not one nickel.
So what happens when a large construction project like this that is rammed down the throats of the community that has actively opposed it, gets half way built but then the high frequency transit stop it was predicated on gets abandoned ? What’s THAT frequency Kenneth ?
“Land use decisions should be made on less shaky ground than that occupied by MTS.”
Amen brother, amen !
I forgot to include the link to David Garrick’s UT article; here it tis:
I continue to think something as simple as installing turnstiles at trolley stations would help a lot. I was on a very crowded blue line trolley yesterday, and saw almost no one pay. I’m not mad at them or complaining about their behavior – there’s literally nothing stopping them from doing it, so I understand. But just about everyone on this trolley was a working professional or a student, likely in the position that they could have paid for the trip or had it subsidized by their work or school. Raising the rate of the trolley or bus won’t do anything. It might even incentive more people to not pay and continue to ride…
One constant problem I encounter is the validators/scanners. I used the Pronto app and the validators often don’t scan. The work fine on the busses but it seems half of the trolley scanners just don’t scan. Oh well free ride then. I wonder this plays at least part of the role in the current financial debacle?
In my experience, the vast majority of people who ride the trolley have purchased monthly passes (either a plastic Compass card or a phone app), which entitle them to unlimited rides for a month for a flat fee, discounted for seniors, disabled, etc. Riders are supposed to validate their ride at the stations, but many of them forget or are in a rush. However, failing to validate doesn’t cost MTS anything because those rides are prepaid. There’s another card payment option, where each ride is deducted off the cash amount stored on the card (for people who ride infrequently), but I’ve never done that. On top of that, trolley transit security is excellent and the officers are super-professional. Most of the times I ride, officers board the trains at random and check every passenger for a valid card or ticket. On the buses, there’s no escaping not paying a fair, either by card or cash, because the drivers monitor the boarding process. Occasionally, they let homeless people ride without paying, which is the humane thing to do, in my opinion, for people who are totally destitute, mentally ill, or crippled. It appears to be up to the discretion of the driver. Some are more lenient than others. One of the best improvement to MTS over the years is the ability to renew a Compass card online. It can be done in a few seconds and is effective immediately.
No more compass card. It was replaced with Pronto. Not really unlimited. I have the app so I don’t know exactly how the card works but with the app, you feed money into it and when you ride the bus you scan the QR code. It deducts 2.50 and if you transfer with in a certain time frame you still have to scan but no money will be deducted. During the month, after no meany deductions the rest of the month is free.
You are absolutely correct! I meant to say Pronto, not Compass! But then again, I’ve been riding San Diego’s public transit since the #35 bus was the “O” bus, and the #28 bus was the “L” bus. I still have schedules from the early 1960s. They’re now collectors items! You have a different kind of card (the standard Fare Capping/Pay-As-You-Go) than I do. As a senior (65 years old, or older), I pay $23 a month for unlimited riding. On October 1, the prices will increase a few dollars. From what I understand, they will increase again in a year. A great deal and a huge money saver, any way you look at it!
Hmmm. I’m now old enough for unlimited riding since last month. I still drive often enough to where it won’t yet pay for itself but it’s good to know I have that option.
So how will this affect all of the planned and approved high-density buildings (ADU’s, Midway Sinking, and Towers) going up with no parking allowances that were approved based on “planned future bus routes”?