San Diego Trolley officials cracked down on habitual fare jumpers Thursday by ending a practice they say has been costing the trolley system $1 million a month by discouraging riders from paying the fare. The move was prompted by a recent tenfold increase in fare jumping that has prompted trolley officials to begin exploring how the system could shift from open stations to closed stations that have gates and turnstiles. In conjunction with approving the crackdown Thursday, the Metropolitan Transit System board that oversees the trolley requested an analysis of how fare evasion rates differ when comparing closed and open transit systems. The crackdown on fare evasion and the new study plans come at a time when local officials are trying to strengthen the transit system and boost ridership as the region becomes more densely populated. The crackdown — which the board approved unanimously after spirited debate about its impact on low-income people — ends a 4-year-old policy allowing fare jumpers to simply pay the $2.50 fare when caught. The initial goal of the program was to avoid saddling low-income people with large fines and court fees that could make it harder to make ends meet and also damage their credit. But trolley officials say that they estimate that nearly 60,000 riders have realized they can game the system and ride free again and again until the rare occasion when a security officer asks for proof of payment. The crackdown raises the fine for fare jumping from $2.50 — the cost of the fare only — to $25, a change that trolley officials say will encourage more people to pay each time they ride. “We want there to be a penalty or consequence so people have an incentive to pay their fare,” said Karen Landers, general counsel for MTS, which oversees the trolley and a large fleet of buses. But the board softened the crackdown by delaying it to Feb. 1 and agreeing that first-time offenders will have their $25 fine waived. County Supervisor Monica Montgomery Steppe, a member of the MTS board, said the crackdown should only target people who habitually evade paying. “Why would we target people that do it once and never again?” she said. MTS data show that 58,838 user accounts, or about 39%, are responsible for nearly 92% of fare jumping incidents. The remaining 61% of riders make up only 8% of incidents. Officials blamed the problem on two things coming together in an unanticipated way. A rider typically gets asked to show proof of fare payment on 3% to 6% of trips, making it a reasonable gamble to fare jump. But fare evasions didn’t surge until MTS switched its fare payment system from Compass to Pronto in fall 2021. On Pronto, many riders stopped springing for $72 monthly and $6 daily passes and instead opted for a $2.50-per-trip, pay-as-you-go option because Pronto already caps fares, eliminating the incentive to buy passes up front. Once you pay $6 in a day or $72 in a month, Pronto stops charging you for that day or month. Since the shift to Pronto, the percentage of total trips taken that officials estimate weren’t paid for has risen from about 3% to more than 32%. They say the higher evasion rate is costing the trolley system somewhere between $11 million and $14 million per year — or about $1 million a month. Officials said those losses are particularly concerning with MTS facing projected annual budget deficits of roughly $80 million per year. First-time offenders can appeal the $25 fine, and it will be waived if there is no evidence they have previously made an on-the-spot payment when caught. The board also agreed to make paying the $25 fines easier by allowing people to pay by phone or online. Some board members requested a study of where fare jumping happens most often, in order to help determine where inconvenient pay stations or other infrastructure challenges could be playing a role. Leslie Bridges of the Sister Cities Project said the crackdown could widen an already large racial wealth gap in San Diego. “I believe that removing buy-on-the-spot unfairly impacts under-resourced communities,” she said. “I hope you will not unfairly make it more difficult for this segment of transportation consumers simply get around and do what they need to do.” The study comparing fare evasion rates in closed and open transit systems was requested by San Diego Council President Sean Elo-Rivera, another MTS board member. Closed systems, like the New York City subway and BART in the Bay Area, require riders to pay at gates or turnstiles before they can enter a station and board a train. Open systems like San Diego’s allow people into stations and onto trains without passing through gates or turnstiles. Riders are expected to pay at validation kiosks before boarding, but it essentially an honor system. “If what we are trying to do is ensure that everyone who is supposed to pay, pays, there are other more effective ways to do that,” said Elo-Rivera, suggesting a closed system could make sense. While there would be significant upfront costs, they could look relatively small compared to millions in fare losses year after year and escalating costs for security to combat fare jumping, he said. Closing the system could also make it safer, cleaner and more appealing to advertisers, Elo-Rivera said. Landers said closed systems typically have evasion rates similar to San Diego’s open system, and she said personnel costs aren’t likely to go down. “You actually probably would have to still have people at each of stations — otherwise you get people jumping fare gates and things like that,” she said. Sharon Cooney, MTS chief executive, said closing the system would come with logistical challenges. “There are certain locations where it would be really tight to try to put gates and barriers around the actual stations,” she said, mentioning C Street and Fifth Avenue downtown. “We’d have to really design everything to work with the landscape.”