How proposed Metro fare changes could affect riders Though Dyke is the board's most recent addition, the majority of his colleagues have just a slight advantage on him in seniority, given the dramatic turnover in membership last year. In fact, only a handful of the current board members were serving in 2010, the last time the panel approved fare increases. The riders are going to have to help them through this. But the board has not decided on the range of proposals it will send out for public hearings. These are some of the issues the board began to struggle with during its discussion Thursday. General manager's budget Metro's budget season always starts the same way. In the winter, the general manager makes his proposals for fare increases or service cuts, the board accepts some ideas and shreds others, then sets up public hearings. After reviewing the riders" comments, the board tinkers some more, then votes by June on a budget that takes effect July 1. This year, General Manager Richard Sarles proposed no service cuts. But he did propose changes in fares that could please riders who travel at certain peak times or use bike lockers, but the changes would generally mean people would pay more to park, ride buses, or travel by train. He said rush-hour SmarTrip rail fares would increase by an average of less than 5 percent. Peak of the peak The best idea in the budget is the proposed elimination of the peak-of-the-peak fare, the ­20-cent surcharge for Metrorail travel at the height of rush hour. Sarles said the peak of the peak was designed to raise revenue and to manage congestion. In theory, it created a financial incentive for riders to avoid the most crowded times. "That simply didn't happen," Sarles told the board members, but "we certainly complicated the fare system." Commuters have been saying that they're pretty much locked into their travel times. If they could respond to an incentive, the idea of escaping crowded trains would have provided it long ago. Flat fares Paper is so 20th century. Metro is steering people from paper fare cards in favor of electronic ­SmarTrip cards, which are now used by most riders. Sarles proposed to further isolate the fare card by charging a flat fee of $4 for off-peak travel and $6 for rush-hour. You might look at that as a user-friendly fare. Occasional riders, who are more likely to use the paper fare cards, wouldn't have to waste time staring at the charts on the vending machines to calculate a fare down to the nickel. But this is really sticking it to the tourists and other occasional riders. A family of four, traveling off-peak, would pay $32 for a round-trip between Union Station and Smithsonian, stations that are less than two miles apart. The transit staff wants people to consider buying SmarTrip cards, so they'd pay the $5 fee for the card, then load fare value on top of that. If that family of four is in town for a few days, the investment would start to be worthwhile, but it still represents an initial payment of $20 just to get everyone a card.