Long Beach Transit riders deserve a bold and cost-effective vision.
In September 2026, DSA Long Beach launched a campaign to make Long Beach Transit fare-free. Better LBT is a partnership between Car-Lite Long Beach and Enforce the Fares to envision a different, more productive and more cost-effective plan to improve transit access for LBT's tens of thousands of riders, for the same annual budget as ditching fares.

Frequent Beats Free

Fares aren't holding LBT riders back.
In the Fall 2025 Customer Survey 79% of riders said LBT's fares were "reasonable" [Pg. 79]. The facts back them up. Anyone making less than $58,300 (higher for multi-person households) is eligible for the LIFE program, providing unlimited LBT rides for only $41 a month. At minimum wage, someone could earn a monthly LBT pass in just 2h 26m. And while not everyone has a job, seniors can purchase LBT passes for only $16 a month. Fares aren't keeping Long Beach's low income transit riders from getting where they need to go. And now, with the launch of open contactless payment, it's never been easier to pay for LBT.

What LBT needs most is more service hours.
We strongly support the network optimizations recommended in STAR II [Item 17]. However, as a budget neutral redesign, STAR II can't deliver what riders truly need: more buses. Today, LBT is only operating 88.5% of FY2019 service levels [Pg. 42]. Here's what that looks like for riders.

LBT only operates one frequent corridor on weekends (PCH: Traffic Circle to Pacific Av) and no overnight service. On one of LBT's most productive routes (46), 40% of buses turn back 1 mile short of CSULB. On LBT's highest ridership route (61), service drops to every 20 minutes after 8:00pm and on weekends. Due to resource limitations, LBT is not operating the service required by a large, dense city like Long Beach. This is the single greatest problem facing riders.

For the same operating budget as making LBT free, we could restore LBT to prepandemic service levels. What would that look like?

The Better LBT Plan

The Price Tag: $10.2M per year
To stand as an alternative proposal to going fareless, we've matched our budget to what we believe fare elimination would cost LBT. We estimated that cost by subtracting LBT's $122,000 of fare collection overhead from the $10,337,757 of annual fare revenue.

What we get: 49,093 service hours per year
At the current cost of $208.09 per service hour, the $10.2M required to eliminate fares could fund an additional 49,093 annual service hours, a 7.2% increase in service.

Improvements

• Boost 21/22 to every 24min (12min combined) on weekdays until 8pm
  Currently, the 21 and 22 operate every 30 minutes on weekdays.
  Cost per year: 9,009hr $1,874,586 Trips: +8Sa +8Su

• Boost 21/22 to every 30min (15min combined) on weekends
  Currently, the 21 and 22 operate every 40 minutes on weekdays.
  Cost per year: 2,967 $617,405 Trips: +7/7Sa +7/7Su

• Extend all weekday 46 trips to CSULB.
  Currently, 40% of weekday trips on the 46 turn back at PCH/Anaheim.
  Cost per year: 1,334hr $277,488 Trips: Wk: +5.25 service hours

• Boost 41/46 to every 24min (12min combined on Anaheim) on weekends before 8pm
  Currently, the 41 and 46 operate every 30min on weekends.
  Cost per year: 1,762hr $366,707 Trips: +7/7Sa +7/7Su

• Extend 51 span to midnight on weekends
  Currently, the 51 ends service at 11pm on weekends.
  Cost per year: 247 $51,468 Trips: +2Sa +2Su

• Boost 61 to every 15 minutes until 10pm all week.
  Currently, the 61 operates every 30min after 8:30pm and every 20min on weekends.
  Cost per year: 6,003hr $1,249,234 Trips: +5Wk +20Sa +20Su

• Boost 91 and 94 30min (15min combined on 7th) on weekends
  Currently, the 91 and 94 operate every 40min on weekends.
  Cost per year: 2,453hr $510,485 Trips: +6/6Sa +6/6Su

• Extend span of 94 to 1:30am all week
  Service currently ends 12:30pm.
  Cost per year: 696hr $144,831 Trips: +2Wk +2Sa +2Su

• Boost 121 to 20min on weekends
  Currently, the 121 operates every 30min on weekends.
  Cost per year: 2,974 $618,788 Trips: +16Sa +16Su

• Boost 131 to every 30min on weekends
  Currently, the 131 operates every 40min on weekends.
  Cost per year: 1,102 $229,407 Trips: +7Sa +7Su

• Boost 141 to every 20min until 11pm all week.
  Currently, the 141 operates every 30min all week, and ends at 10pm on weekends.
  Cost per year: 7,921hr $1,648,288 Trips: +18Wk +17Sa +17Su

• Extend 141 span from 10pm to 11pm on weekends
  Currently, the 141 ends at 10pm on weekends.
  Cost per year: 226 $47,056 Trips: +2Sa +2Su

• Boost 191/192 to every 24min (12min combined) on weekdays
  Currently, the 191 and 195 operate every 30min on weekdays.
  Cost per year: 8,525hr $1,774,058 Trips: +6/7Wk

• Boost 191/192 to every 30min (15 combined) on weekends
  Currently, the 191 and 195 operate every 40min weekends.
  Cost per year: 3,595hr $748,033 Trips: +7/7Sa +7/7Su

[under construction]
1. The price tag
2. Service Increases
3. Transit Priority
3. Revenue opportunities
4. The mission

DSA-LB's arguments against fares don't add up.

[under construction]
Transportation is a major cost burden, but fares aren't the problem. (include other stuff explaining fare discount options, how small fares are, and car-ownership comparison)

Going fareless is among the worst ways to increase ridership. (Single bundled rebuttal to all ridership increase arguments. Reiterate opportunity cost argument)

DSA-LB is exaggerating operational benefits
(dwell stuff is cherry-picked, tourism arguments don't apply anymore with contactless, Use as opening to attack Tyndell paper. Slip in point about ridership formula funds.)

DSA-LB points to other free systems. Look closer. (Kansas City went back to charging, collection overhead examples are all tiny systems, etc.)

Safety (operator assaults argument misses larger point, rebut Wasserman loop rider citation)

Fares are a small percent of LBT's budget, but that's a policy choice. (carefully explain that fares have been locked in place since 2010 and this is bad policy)

Closing point: Fares aren't unfair. They're a pragmatic tool for running functional transit.