Norton Says Proposal to Permanently End Metro’s Late-Night Service Will Drive Riders Away, Hurt Regional Economy, and Disproportionately Impact Suburban and Low-Income Residents

WASHINGTON, D.C.—Congresswoman Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-DC), Ranking Member of the House Highways and Transit Subcommittee, today issued the following statement expressing her strong opposition to Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority General Manager Paul Wiedefeld’s proposal to permanently end Metro’s late-night weekend service by shutting the system down at midnight on Fridays and Saturdays and at 10:00 p.m. on Sundays.

“Even before the General Manager Wiedefeld’s proposal, I had requested a regional congressional delegation meeting with the Greater Washington Board of Trade, the Federal City Council, the D.C. Chamber of Commerce, and other major business leaders to get their views on the future of Metro. In light of the Wiedefeld proposal, that meeting has become imperative.

“General Manager Wiedefeld has one thing exactly right: safety must continue to be the number one priority for Metro. However, the permanent late-night service reduction proposal seems to indicate Wiedefeld simply accepted the most obvious path without going through the most rigorous analysis of all the options to determine the best one. Even though the safety priority must remain paramount, there are many factors that would inform such an analysis. Among them would be the possible detrimental long-term effects on Metro ridership, the regional economy, and regional businesses and residents. For example, Metro’s already rapidly declining ridership can be attributed not only to the system’s poor condition, but also to inherent factors, such as lower gasoline prices and mounting dissatisfaction with Metro due to service and dependability. Moreover, as critical as SafeTrack remains, the necessary remediation underway risks permanently driving away riders from Metro and onto already congested roads. Scaling back service on a system in which the public has all but lost confidence, without looking at workable alternatives, could cause Metro to wither and take our growing regional economy with it.

“Second only to safety must be Metro’s effect on the regional economy and public and private sector employment. The opening of the Silver Line to spur economic development shows that the system needs expansion, not permanent retraction. This region has transformed itself into one of the nation’s top economic regions. Despite the Great Recession, the region is still growing. Metro’s expansion to late-night service in 1999 was an important indication of changes in the economy of the region and the growth of the private sector. Metro is no longer a service focused only on nine to five federal workers. It is also the day or night engine of an expanding 24-hour economy. Creeping reductions in service could reverse the tremendous economic development the region has seen since Metro expanded its late-night hours.

“While the economic impact on local D.C. businesses may be obvious, the permanent late-night service reduction would also disproportionately hurt lower-income residents, who work late-night shifts, and particularly those commuting home to parts of the region where late-night bus service is unavailable. Most local transit buses in the region do not have late-night service, leaving residents without alternative means of transportation, unlike in the District, where bus service runs until late into the evening and some routes as late as 3:00 a.m. It is noteworthy that Mr. Wiedefeld did not offer alternatives, such as expanded bus service for the region.

“Our entire region continues to accept as first priority safety improvements and the necessity to bring and keep Metro in a state of good repair. Other transit systems manage to do that without retracting service itself. Metro remains the fundamental pillar of the entire regional economy. The proposed permanent shutdown proposal has the potential to have a lasting effect, driving riders away from Metro and causing irreparable harm to the system and regional residents. At the very least the region needs to know which experts and officials were consulted, what the alternatives are, and whether any further permanent service cuts are envisioned. There is no evidence that Metro consulted with the region’s business community, the three regional executives, or elected officials, including Members of Congress. We must work together as a region to find alternatives that do the least harm to residents and local businesses.”