|
|
|
|
|
 |
By Gabriel Metcalf
SPUR
Originally Pulished by San Francisco Business Times
February 2, 2007
It’s counterintuitive, but maybe the best way for Muni to save money is to stop collecting it.
It’s one big idea in a list of big ideas that the Municipal Transportation Agency (MTA), the quasi-independent department that controls our transportation system, should consider.
Big new ideas are necessary because the old ideas to close the budget deficit, fare increases and service cuts, thrust Muni into a downward spiral that deepens its structural deficit and threatens to starve the system to death.
Numbers add up
First, let’s look at the numbers.
Muni’s farebox recovery rate is 18 percent, or $122 million of a $678 million budget. That isn’t much lower than is typical for transit systems: the Golden Gate Transit bus system, Portland’s Tri-Met and Seattle’s Sound Transit each get 22 percent of their revenues from fares. And after raising fares by 50 percent from three years ago, there’s not much more room to squeeze transit riders.
On the expense side, Muni could save $10 million directly by not collecting fares: maintaining equipment, counting and depositing money and enforcing proof of payment. More importantly, Muni wastes half a million hours each year waiting for people to stuff dollars and coins into the fare machines. This delay translates to a huge expense because fewer buses and drivers would be needed if buses could complete their runs, and get back out in revenue service, more quickly. In fact, there is probably no single easier operational change Muni could make to provide faster and more reliable service.
When you take into account actual costs plus the monetized cost of time delay, Muni may be losing money by collecting it.
If we were to make Muni free, there would be a great deal of questions to address. How do you keep the buses from becoming roving homeless shelters or teenage hangouts? How can we make sure people value what they don’t pay for? Can Muni handle the extra passengers free Muni would attract? Where will Muni store the extra buses they may need to handle the added passenger load. If we consider Muni a public utility, what is the best way to fund it?
There are systems to learn from. Small fare-free systems and large systems with fare-free zones abound. Portland’s downtown "fareless square" was recently expanded to the adjoining Lloyd commercial district at the urging of the district’s merchants, who chose to increase revenue from parking meters to pay for the move.
Packaging big-idea reforms
We encourage the MTA to look at this big idea and several others as an essential antidote to the downward spiral caused by years of small tinkering.
Free Muni, or something close to it, might be a healthy sweetener as part of a package of big-idea reforms that should include route restructuring and stop consolidation. Speeding up service by 25 percent on the routes that carry 80 percent of Muni’s passengers can reduce Muni’s structural deficit by 75 percent, according to SPUR calculations.
CalTrain, for example, in responding to their budget crisis, eliminated many stops but provided faster service for most customers. The result? They increased ridership by 25 percent.
We’re not sure free Muni is the way to go, but we are sure that yet another round of fare increases and service cuts is not the way to go. As the extreme opposite of the MTA’s recent practice, free Muni and faster service is certainly worth a look.
- - - - - -
Gabriel Metcalf is executive director of San Francisco Planning and Urban Research.
Note: Articles are posted for the purpose of generating ideas and honest debate on how San Francisco can live up to its full promise and potential. Posting of an article does not imply an endorsement by the author of Gavin Newsom for Mayor, nor an endorsement by Gavin Newsom for Mayor of the positions set forth in the article.
- : 4.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
March 11th, 2007 at 7:41 pm
FREE MUNI - thank you for your article : I think we must approach this alternative because MUNI is driving everyone to their CARS!! And I would imagine that MUNI employees DRIVE to work because MUNI is unreliable.
I like many others work for a living and have a schedule. Why shouldn’t MUNI ? This city is hostage to MUNI. To break that relationship, FREE MUNI. Change the system. Question, where is it written that being a Bus Driver is a career? I am referring to some drivers treating passengers with contempt. Aren’t we MUNI’s trade so to speak? If everyone stops using public transportation where does that leave public transportation?…the situation is dire and while speaking of FREE MUNI is ‘ about time ‘…there isn’t much time left. I suggest one day out of every week (say MONDAYS/fridays ) be offically called Spare the Air Days…and make everyone aware - use the advertising space on the side or back of every bus - so the PUBLIC knows. Then the change can begin.
we all know air pollution is here everyday so we should treat the problem now : one day of every week is spare the air day : monday or fridays.
also one more question Why on the week end is muni LESS available?
james buckley
March 15th, 2007 at 9:27 pm
The Mayor should declare Muni fare-free on, say, June 1, 2007, for one year - as an experiment to see if it would work.
He should also, at the same time, launch a “Keep Muni Free” campaign along the lines of the PBS pledge campaigns. Plaster all the bus stop Kiosks and the underground stations and the buses themselves with ads exhorting the citizenry to send in a pledge of $100, $200, $500, $1000, or whatever they can afford, to “Keep Muni Free” (i.e. beyond the one year trial period). They could offer gifts proportional to the size of the pledge, like scale models of the “F” line trains for the kids, or posters of Gavin in a swimsuit for the gals and gays, and other stuff like that.
There are plenty of folks (self included) who would gladly pledge as much or more than we currently pay annually for a fast pass (e.g. $500 plus) just to avoid having to buy the damn things each month, and remembering to bring them every morning, and feeling guilty about boarding on the back of the bus, etc.
Some people would pledge more than the fast pass cost, and some would undoubtely pledge less, including nothing, but I’m virtually certain the Muni would raise as much or more than the difference between the amount of fares they currently collect and the current cost to collect it.
Anyway, just an idea. My wife likes it too, if that means anything.
Best regards,
Gene Eplett (a fan)
1461 Sanchez Street
San Francisco, California 94131
(415) 641-1110
P.S. the loudest argument I’ve heard against a Fare Free Muni is that it would “increase the ridership thereby requiring more buses, and additional maintenance crews” Sounds to me like an argument ‘for’ not ‘against’!
May 16th, 2007 at 10:05 pm
As a Muni rider for 6 years, I have experienced the many frustrations riders face while using Muni. I wholeheartedly agree that Muni is ‘driving people to their cars’. Many of the riders that ride on the Free Muni days may not see the day to day hassles Muni puts its passengers through. I would glady pay more to ride Muni if it were a reliable, fast, clean, and safe mode of transportation. Clearly passengers rely on Muni to get them to work and school and therefore need a set schedule to depend on. For many people it takes far less time to actually drive to work than to ride Muni. In many cities public transportation is the most direct and efficient way to get to work. Unfortunately riding Muni would double, and sometimes triple the time it took for me to get to work (on time). I believe many of San Francisco’s working class would be more inclined to ride Muni if they were guaranteed to get to their jobs on time.
Muni has also become incredibly unsanitary and unsafe as well. It is full of litter, urine, and during peak times crowds pushing and shoving, with riders that demonstrate no respect for children or the elderly. I think many more citizens of San Francisco would glady ride Muni if the conditions, efficiency, and reliability improved.