MTA ignores public input, proposes increases in fares Friday (but no extended meter hours)
Despite strong opposition by riders in recent public hearings, the MTA Board is planning to vote on proposed service cuts and fare increases to balance this year’s budget. SF Streetsblog has a good summary of what is scheduled.
In particular, the proposal does NOT include extended parking meter hours or meter enforcement on Sunday, but it does charge riders $70 per month for the privilege of using express routes and cable cars (over our opposition) and it increases senior, youth, and disabled monthly pass fares. It’s not clear if the same premium pass will also be available on BART, or if riders will need to buy multiple premium passes to ride expresses, cable cars, and BART – but regardless, this is a terrible proposal that moves Muni further away from providing universal service throughout the city, and completely ignores the Transit-First policy in the charter.
Also, a major reason for the immediate cuts is the decision by TWU Local 250A members to reject a proposed package of pension contributions and other work rule savings. Supervisor Elsbernd is proposing an amendment to the Charter that would repeal the salary floor that is there now, allowing the MTA to collectively bargain for wages as well as benefits and working conditions – we are watching this closely. But because the proposed concessions were rejected, they can’t be used to balance this year’s budget.
We urge all riders to attend Friday’s meeting (9am, City Hall Room 400) and urge a NO vote on this proposal. Sunday and evening meter hours are a much better way to solve the budget deficit for transit riders (and merchants also, who will benefit from higher turnover from their customers.)
Update: The Chronicle covered this today. Also, SPUR Director Gabriel Metcalf published an open letter to the Transport Workers Union in the Guardian urging them to vote in favor of work rule concessions.
What is the rationale for Rescue Muni opposing fare increases. How will that improve Muni?
Universal does not mean transportation for the poor. The goal should be to entice the middle class to use Muni by providing good service. People may be willing to pay for good service. If discount passes are necessary they can be based on low income not age or disabled status.
I agree with the proposed Charter amendment. But I would go further and allow competition from private providers.
Extending parking meter hours and enforcement on Sunday may make sense on its own merits. But it should not be linked to Muni.
The rational is that we already had a monthly pass increase, and quite a big one at that. Bumping fairs $10 every 6 months will quickly drive ridership down, and not because people don’t want to ride, because they won’t be able to afford to! At some point it becomes cheaper to drive, which is bad for the city’s overall quality of life. We aren’t LA, though ironically they already charge for Sunday meters.
Parking is part of the SFMTA, it is all the same org. As it stands, a portion of meter and garage revenue goes to Muni, so this is an extension of an existing revenue resource.
Competition from private carriers is fine, but unless they get subsidies they’ll never survive. There actually were a lot of jitney services at one time, but now I think only one survives (Market Street Caltrain shuttle). And good luck getting private carriers a subsidy from the MTA.