I think we need to have some new bus routes out where I live.
I don't think it's fair that some people pay the newly increased bus fares to support our city's transportation costs, while other people are able to jump on the back of the bus or use expired tickets to avoid the fare. I know that we all love this city, appreciate the bus systems in place and depend on them daily, so why can't we all pay our fair share and give back? I think if MUNI collected the correct total fare, we might all see a better and more efficient bus system.
I think the monthly pass is wwaayyy too much. I remember the good ol' days when it was...much cheaper.
I know a lot of people who would buy a pass if it was lower. I bet they could make up for lower prices with a higher volume of passes sold.
the buses at night follow the same routes as those during the day. if someone wants to get across town to the nightlife areas in SOMA, you need to take up to three buses. That is reason enough to drive. Hey MUNI-- you know why everyone is off the 38 after union square? Because we're not going to the financial district at night! We're going to SOMA, or N. Beach, or the Castro, or the Haight.
There ought to be a bus alternative to driving or getting lucky with a taxi to/fro this area. The bus would follow a line that departs from Union Square and goes direct to SOMA, 10th/Folsom area and around that area. Maybe it would even circle into 16th/mission/valencia and then to the castro and back.
this would make a lot more sense then driving empty buses past union square all the way to the transbay and back.
What percent of the MUNI budget is actually paid for by fares? It might be cheaper to have FREE MUNI instead of spending the money to have a pay system. Does anyone know what part of the muni budget comes from fares? 20% 25% more? less?Here is a cut and paste of what I posted under two other discussion threads:
Has anyone considered making Muni free? It seems that one of the biggest complaints is that there is lots of fare evasion and people who pay their fares resent seeing people ride for free. If there were no fees and everyone rode for free then this major complaint would go away.
So what are some pros and cons?
PROS: 1. No more complaints about fare evaders. 2. no need to buy and maintain fare collection boxes. 3. Eliminate the cost of printing transfers, fast passes, etc. 4. Eliminate the cost of distributing fast passes to stores . 5. Eliminate the cost of emptying fare boxes, tallying fares, and all the associated costs of processing fares. 6. Eliminate the cost of collecting fast pass money from vendors plus the overhead of tracking those monies. 7. Lower frustration for drivers since they don't need to enforce fares. 8. Faster on-loading of passengers. 9. Substantial increase in ridership - free is a great price. 10. Reduced automobile traffic because a free bus system is cheaper than gas and auto wear and tear.
CONS: 1. Lose all current revenue. 2. Lost revenue may exceed savings created by eliminating fares. 3. No way to keep homeless people, panhandlers, etc off since they could ride all day and night for free (unless some strictly enforced rules were enacted). 4. Loss of numerous Muni jobs related to: fare box maintenance, printing of transfers and passes, bookkeeping for fares and passes, jobs related to fare enforcement, jobs related to selling/distributing fast passes. 5. Elimination of all these jobs/salaries/benefits may not offset loss of revenue. (Well, that's just a restatement of #2 I guess)
While it might appear that there are more pros than cons, the cons are pretty significant - especially the $$$$$. On the other hand, most of the problems relating to fare evasion would require lots of $$$$$ to address, so eliminating fares altogether will cost money, but so would trying to collect fares from fare evaders.
One possibility would be to break Muni into two separate businesses with "Free Muni" supplies by the city, and "Pay Busses" owned and operated by a for profit company. Personally I think the political and logistical ramifications of that idea would be a nightmare, but it is an idea that should be out on the table.
Anyway, what do others think? Anyone interested in doing some cost analysis on what it would net out if we simply made Muni free and got rid of all the infrastructure around fares and passes?
Eddietortue - thanks for the research. So I guess the question is: how badly does the city want to be a "Transit First" city. I also wonder of SF would experience a 50% increase in use. What percent of people not using Muni today are there? I mean, given the cost of parking, we have already moved people out of cars and onto Muni.
Considering the number of complaints about fare evaders, and the city's commitment to public transit, maybe it's time to bring this back to the table. The fact that it was looked at in the past is actually good news - it means that it must have had some merit to get that far. Never hurts to look at it again.
Thanks for the link. Good information and interesting to note that fares only cover 20% of Muni's costs.
Paid for by Phil Ting for Assembly 2012. FPPC ID# 1343137
TO RESET SF
Arts & Culture
Sign up for the ResetSan Francisco Newsletter
Join Phil Ting for Assembly
Support the Middle Class Scholarship
Phil Ting: An API for Ethics in City Gov't
VIDEO: Your Thoughts on Muni
Time for Universal Internet Access
Is New York City Taking the Lead?
San Francisco Needs Open Government
Do you think gun owners should be required to get liability insurance in CA?