The Journalist
Lead Service Attendant
The majority of transit systems would be better off using fare income to run more service than making it free. There comes a point where it stops making sense to charge a fare, since doing so does have some potential downsides-the cost of doing so to begin with, buses stop longer, the fare being a barrier to use. But that point is likely farebox recovery in the single digits. Otherwise it's probably worthwhile to charge fares.
There are some corner cases where specific lines or service areas make sense to be free, say if the route is a feeder to a light rail line and almost everyone riding that route is transferring, or for a tourist-oriented circulator where the target market is significantly more likely to ride if they don't have to figure out how to pay for it.
A potential middle ground is not enforce fares at all and only intervene if the passenger is disruptive. This is an important point because there is substantial overlap between "didn't pay the fare" and "causes problems."
There are some corner cases where specific lines or service areas make sense to be free, say if the route is a feeder to a light rail line and almost everyone riding that route is transferring, or for a tourist-oriented circulator where the target market is significantly more likely to ride if they don't have to figure out how to pay for it.
A potential middle ground is not enforce fares at all and only intervene if the passenger is disruptive. This is an important point because there is substantial overlap between "didn't pay the fare" and "causes problems."