MTA Proposes Cuts to Every Muni Line to Close $16.9 Million Budget Gap

4254526368_18462e94ef.jpgFlickr photo: Justin.Beck

The MTA is proposing broad-ranging service cuts to Muni in order to close a $16.9 million projected budget gap through the end of the fiscal year. The cuts – far greater in scope than the service changes implemented in December – will reduce frequencies on every Muni line and, if they’re approved by the agency’s Board, will be coupled with fare increases on services including the F-line, express routes, and cable cars. Numerous additional changes are proposed, including charging MTA employees for parking and seeking labor concessions.

After alluding to possible further service changes on several occasions, the MTA made the proposal for cuts official with the release of a budget document (PDF) that will be presented at Tuesday’s MTA Board meeting. Under the proposal, peak service headways would increase by somewhere in the range of one to two minutes on rapid and express bus lines, one to five minutes on local bus lines, and five to ten minutes on community bus lines, with rapid rail frequencies unchanged. Midday and late evening headways would increase by anywhere from one to five minutes on rapid and express bus lines, one to five minutes on rapid rail lines, two to ten minutes on local bus lines, and five to ten minutes on community bus lines.

MTA spokesperson Judson True said the cuts would go in place as soon as May 1 if the agency’s Board approves them at their March 2 meeting. All told, the cuts would save the agency $4.8 million in the current fiscal year, and $28.5 million annually, by eliminating 313,000 service hours each year.

"The economic downturn has taken a tremendous financial toll on the
SFMTA and transportation agencies around the country," said MTA
Executive Director Nat Ford. "There are no easy solutions."

The rest of the $16.9 million gap would be made up with a package of changes that includes a $3 increase to F-Line historic streetcar cash fares, new requirements for express bus and cable car riders to use a premium $70 monthly pass instead of the cheaper $60 pass, increases in discount pass prices to $30, and an increase in the residential parking permit fee to $96 from $76. The agency is also hoping for labor concessions that could save $10 million annually and $700,000 this budget year, which would also include changes to work rules.

MTA employees would start paying for parking at work, bringing in $200,000 for the agency this fiscal year, and Muni customers would pay an credit card fee for online transactions, while customers visiting the MTA’s customer service center would pay transaction fees for services that are also available online. Citation costs would also increase by $1.50 across the board, and the MTA will seek $7 million in Prop K sales tax funds from the SFCTA "maintenance and state of good repair to ensure FTA compliance and system performance," according to the budget presentation.

The glaring omission from the proposals was an extension of parking meter hours, something MTA staff presented on last year, and which a staff study said could bring in millions to the agency while improving the city’s parking management. "It’s not part of the staff recommendation for Tuesday," said True.

The proposed cuts are the second round of the agency’s effort to address a projected mid-year budget shortfall that started at about $45 million. Staff whittled that down to the current $16.9 million figure through measures that included cutting 110 positions, leaving another 140 positions unfilled, using federal stimulus funds to cover operating costs, and making other cuts that didn’t require authorization from the MTA Board.

This round of proposed changes will require MTA Board approval, and some of the changes require Board of Supervisors approval. None are a done deal, so there should be a significant amount of
debate in the coming months on how the MTA will proceed. Some further
details of how each line will be affected should be available on
Tuesday, said True.

The budget proposals will be presented at the next MTA Board meeting on Tuesday, January 19, at 2 p.m. in San Francisco City Hall, Room 400. The budget discussion is Item 11 on the agenda, and there will be a chance for the public to comment.

  • Why aren’t MTA employees taking MUNI to work?

  • Who in their right mind would pay $5 for F-Market service? If Muni metro fails, do you believe that people would dare take the F-Market? What next, charge $5 rides on the 47-Van Ness because it also serves Fisherman’s Wharf?

    Muni should look into their own ranks and start laying off non essential personnel. More hikes, more fees, less service; Newsom promises a transit first city, but screws all of us once again with more cuts and hikes.

  • James Figone

    Another round of service cuts but parking meter rates and permit fees are left alone. At $78/year, a parking permit allows the car owner to park for $.21/day on our streets. MONTHLY muni pass fees are fast approaching the YEARLY parking permit fee.

  • Brutal. This will make MUNI a non-starter for even more people – but downtown cannot handle the alternative of everyone driving.

    Perhaps this is what’s needed to continue the velorution.

  • I am FURIOUS. What is the most frustrating is that it seems there is NOTHING the average resident can do about this. Is there not any way we as citizens of SF can collectively mobilize to say ENOUGH to Gavin, to the Board of Supes, to the MTA Board, to Nat Ford?

  • Fabulous, make our buses even less frequent and more crowded.

  • I say, give Muni hell. Their next board meeting is Tuesday, January 19th at 2PM in City Hall.

    If you can’t be there, start e-mailing those board members.

  • We need a march on room 200. Raise the meters, keep the service. This is BS.

  • Criminal. They are all criminals. Pet projects like Central Subway, which do nothing for the vitality of MUNI get funding and staffing – while every day service gets cut and fares go up.

    Something has to change and change now. I like John Murphy’s slogan.

    “Raise the meters, keep the service!”

  • pceasy

    Not 1 cut from management or employees???? NOT ONE???> ARE YOU KIDDING ME? How can a union have a built in clause that says that they must be the second highest paid transit employees in the country

    HOW ABOUT PARKING? This is insane. Everyone must tell their supervisors that this is unacceptable or we will start recalling them. Our local leaders, from the mayor to the board of supervisors has had no leadership on this issue.

    Muni is the worst run department in the city. Yet its run by the highest paid employee in the city. How can Nat Ford continue to keep his job after MTA’s dismal performance in 2009. His salary should be cut and its time to start dealing with the union.

    City leaders. Enough is enough. TIME TO DEAL WITH THE UNION.

    Time to raise parking fees, parking meters. It’s time that we are residents say enough is enough.

  • Central Subway is funded by capital funds, which can’t be used for operations, per the feds. So money being spent on Central Subway is not necessarily money that can be diverted elsewhere. It’s either used on the Central Subway or not used at all.

    The union clause that it’s the second highest paid is written into the city or county charter, I believe. #1 and #3 are usually Boston and Santa Clara/San Jose.

  • @ Eddo, understood BUT the Central Subway isn’t going to run for free once it is completed. It is going to be very costly to maintian. More LRVs and more underground tunneling to keep dry and in good repair isn’t going to be cheap.

    This is all while providing little to no benefit to the overall transportation needs of the North East section of the city. You are aware that it stops at Washington St right? This will barely serve Chinatown, let alone North Beach/Russian Hill/Maria/Cow Hollow. Actually, those neighborhoods will see their service cut (i.e. 30/45) since it will be considered duplicate.

    So we should just take the “capital” money and let the boat sink in 10 yrs when the subway is done. Good plan, hate to see that money go to a worthwhile transit project.

  • @ eddo, sorry. Don’t need to start an argument with you about the Central Subway, but it should be part of the discussion. We need to join together at a time like this and fight the powers that be. We (as transit riders) can’t keep taking it on the back while drivers don’t see any increased costs.

  • Just saying – the Central Subway is the Central Subway and it’s not running yet and it’s not using any operations money. That’s what we’re focused on and that’s where we are facing a budget shortfall. We can talk about merits of Central Subway, sure, but to blame it for the operations budgetary shortfall is wrong.

    I agree with you re: auto drivers. Charge them, charge them A LOT. This city needs to recognize the true cost of driving on everyone, not just on transit riders. And if they want bitch and moan and move out, let them move out. SF needs more housing anyways.

  • Kiwina

    At this rate a commute on the once-a-day 1-California route will be $10 each way. Doesn’t anybody in management understand the futility of relying on fare increases to cover every budget gap? Overhead — including salaries, overtime, and benefits MUST be reworked and reduced! Otherwise the system will continue toward total insolvency until the whole thing collapses.

  • Sooner or later, MUNI will get to the point where there are no buses or trains running. This will not stop them from spending ridiculous amounts of money on drivers for this non-existent transportation.

  • I’m not blaming the Central Subway for the budget shortfall. I’m just saying that if we are hitting the wall presently, how in the world is MUNI going to absorb the increased operational costs. Not to mention the staff dedication to the project at MTA that could be used to make MUNI run better right now and to find funding resources. Limited staff means that they need to leveraged much better then they are currently.

    I guess that is a moot point though. If we can’t get the MTA to increase revenue though parking meters, etc then the only place to raise money is by raising MUNI fares and cutting MUNI service.

  • the greasybear

    Buy a bicycle and you’ve got your own transit system between your legs, with no service cuts, rate hikes or $70 monthly charges for an increasingly worthless FastPass.

    What the hell happened to San Francisco? Seriously, WTF? We’re cutting bus every line, even at rush hour, but we can’t manage to charge private motorists a reasonable rate for the space they use to store their property on our shared roadways?

  • patrick

    Lets not get distracted by another CS argument. It has no impact on the present and the real issue right now is the city government’s complete unwillingness to raise meter rates.

    I hope this move gets enough of us angry enough to renew an advocacy group. The previous changes were targeted and made sense, so there was not much opposition. These changes make no sense when the city has other avenues to bridge the budget gap: raising meter rates.

    Let’s put a group together and start making some noise.

  • My bike is my best friend. I fight for MUNI because I don’t have a car and after my bike, MUNI is my only other friend.

    But really – let’s take step back. The root of this and all transit funding problems is Prop 13. And then to make matters worse, the Govinator has been robbing the state transit fund (set up because of Prop 13 so that PT gets adequate funding) for the last 2-3 yrs and plans on doing it permanently. You can get upset all you want at the Unions, but this is really a problem with our basic taxation and allocation of funds system.

  • @ patrick, you are right – I’ve said it’s a moot point. I was just worked up.

    But yes, we need to fight to get parking meter rates raised. I’m with you 100%.

  • mikesonn, the reason EVERY transit system in the country is expanding their system but cutting operations is because of lobbying. And I really mean every system. Look at NYC and the 2nd avenue subway, DC and Dulles etc.

    Where does the lobbying come from? When you expand a system, you need consultants, engineers, electricians, construction unions, new vehicles, carpenters etc etc. Giant pay day for everyone involved. When you expand operations who gets the money? Just the operators. Who cares about the riders when 1 billion can be spread amongst construction firms instead of paying wages to operators?

    Im not saying expansion isn’t good, but we need to realize why it’s so easy (relatively) to plop a billion down for expansion but impossible to find 100 million for service.

    eddo mentions that the capital funds rule comes from the feds. Anybody know when that rule was made? I don’t but I wouldn’t be surprised if it came under republican leadership at the bequest of a contractor, engineer or construction firm.

  • Evan

    This is NOT acceptable. More cuts after we’ve already lost so much bus service? What will it take to change this? California, the region and the city must fund a better basic level of service than this. It’s shameful for those of us that depend on Muni.

  • James Figone

    Yes, we need to get drivers to pay more in terms of meter rates and fees. We could also ask Muni to reduce the number of stops instead of reducing the frequency of buses. MTA used the fiscal problems to expedite portions of the TEP in the last round of changes. They should do so again by cutting stops in this round.

    As MUNI riders are hit with multiple increases, parking permit fees are left unchanged. Increased fees on drivers are not even on the table. Very sad.

  • Sean

    This is exactly why after three years of commuting via Muni I gave up and switched over to commuting via my scooter or bicycle.

    With respect to metering increases — you are aware that they were raised mid-summer in many parts of the city, right? In May of last year I lobbied the MTA’s traffic engineer to install more motorcycle/scooter parking spots near my office because they were always full and there was always extra car parking. Win-win, right?

    Things were great for awhile because the spots were frequently taken which after all, meant revenue for the city. Then came the increases (from .20/hr to .70/hr) and now the spots are empty 90% of the time.

    Don’t misconstrue my observations as a complaint though. It would just seem that the city is probably making less money in certain areas post-increase.

  • Melvis

    I agree with those that say the central subway is an unbelievable waste of money: wrong route, serving way too few points. And I’d love to ride a bike, and used to, until both my feet stopped working. That not only prevents me from riding a bike but driving a car also. I need MUNI, and I need it to be frequent, reliable, and safe.

    A guy can dream, right?

  • G. Cauthen

    The timing of the Muni service slashes is revealing.

    December 5, 2009: After months of planning, SFMTA makes substantial cuts in Muni service, coupled with fare increses.

    January 7, 2010: Federal Transportation Administration informs SFMTA that it will fund the construction of the Central Subway only if SFTMA can show that the increased operating and maintence costs of the subway will not adversely affect Muni’s other operations.

    January 15, 2010: SFMTA announces further draconian cuts and fare increases, scheduled to go into effect on May 1, 2010.

    In getting ready for a large anticipated Central Subway grant, the SFMTA wastes no time in positioning itself to get those federal dollars. If that requires shrinking the rest of the Muni system, so be it. After all, what could be more important than all that Central Subway pork? Certainly not the service on Muni’s other 75 lines or the interests of 700,000 daily Muni riders…

  • sf108

    Maybe Muni wants us to begin driving again. The service is poor already and if they cut services then it will be worst. As a city, we are focusing on the wrong agenda. Instead of encouraging riders to take Muni, we are discouraging. Perhaps they should raise rates instead of cut services.

  • Jay

    That’s it, FU MUNI- I am copying my friend s Fast Pass from now on and you are not getting a dime of my money ! Give back your damn bonuses you morons !

  • Jeffrey W. Baker

    Charge even more to board a crush-loaded 1BX in the morning? Brilliant.

  • Chris

    Viva la Velorution!!! The only positive thing I have to say about Muni is that their service was so terrible that it made me get on a bicycle.

    Speaking of bicycles… why is it the city can so easily cut transit service without considering the environmental impact… while we have to wait years for an EIR to slap some paint down on the streets for a few bike lanes.

  • This is proof of the cynical attitude that pervades Room 200, now that the political liars for hire from the failed Governor’s race are in place. Newsom spoke not a word about Muni in his state of the City address, then pushes this crapola out late Friday so people won’t notice.

    At this point it is clear the present system no longer works and has no accountability. We are on track to create an expensive, poorly run system that ensures people won’t find it useful and will go back to their cars. We cannot allow this to go through without some sort of fight, and we need something better than a pathetic march on the MTA like the one Avalos led last year.

    This Mayor is an enemy of Muni owner/riders as are his allies on the Board, and we can’t even necessarily count progressives on our side anymore either. If the leaders won’t lead, perhaps it’s time we all did instead?

  • Richard Mlynarik

    Central Subway = mafia (PBQD subdivision) payoff scam.

    Muni operations = mafia (TWU-250A) payoff scam.

    Muni: why the hell would anybody lift a finger for something so utterly and transparently corrupt and worthless?

    Die.

  • Who the hell needs MUNI when you have a chauffeured SUV (don’t worry kids, it’s a HYBRID!)

  • Thought experiment, on the ‘this is more fuel for the velorution’ theme. Which I support.

    If you could one day have every able-bodied person from MUNI ridership who knows how to ride a bicycle boycot MUNI for the day and bike their commute intstead, just imagine…

    Cars would have to slow down. Vehicular cycling would be possible and really the only option on a lot of streets–bike lanes on Market would be so crowded! Many would never go back.

    Maybe it is time to stop trying to convince cagers to start biking (a la Gas Free Fridays, SFBC) but to convince beleaguered MUNI riders to get on a bike. MUNI Free Fridays? I support MUNI and ride it frequently, I have no interest in taking it down or just harping on it. But I am more than willing to add MUNI riders to the bike lanes in this city, especially when they see that it is cheaper and so much more fun and fast. Adding all of these bus riders to the streets would also eliminate the issues I currently have with encouraging more people to start biking (supreme inadequacy of our current infrastructure for any but the most daring and risky among us, the throw-away sharrowization of major streets and surface-level freeways, etc). because if there were a critical mass on the road at all times, what can they do?

    Imagine.

  • Beenhere

    Worse and worse. A Union monstrosity. And the Central Subway? Now?? Total waste.

  • the greasybear

    And thus begins the death spiral. Cut after cut, fare hike after far hike, ridership will start to decline. That brings in less money for Muni, spurring more cuts, shedding even more riders…

    Way to go, San Francisco. Unfuckingbelievable.

    Someone should sue for an EIR!

  • doodie

    wtf, I just added $5 a month to $60 to ride muni only which has cut a bunch of routes. now they want another $10 from me to ride the cable cars and cut some more routes.

    is there anything that can be done?

    will a petition on the march or November to make all mta/muni related changes go before a public vote work?

    this is starting to get insane…

    7/09 – pass goes from 45 – 55
    1/10 – pass goes from 55 – 60 muni only and 70 for muni and bart

  • ‘they’ in last sentence = the cagers who usually make cycling in this city so dangerous.

  • JC

    Love the contrast: “hoping” to get labor concessions. Note that the desire to charge users more is not as aspirational. We’ve gotten to the point where MUNI heads are going to have to roll. I agree with the poster who argues that the capital requirements of the Central Subway are driving some of these draconian measures. Ugly.

  • DT

    Once upon a time (before the Fast Pass) there were NO Discount fares during peak commute hours. All riders paid *full* Adult fare; Express service carried a 25% surcharge. Perhaps they should go back to the old system that worked.

    Tinkering with the F Market is ludicrous. Due to the service cuts in December, the ONLY way I can get to my dentist’s office is via the F. I hate going there in peak tourist season because of all the pickpockets on the overcrowded streetcars.

    To all of you bicycle fanatics: My ability to ride a bicycle, play tennis, softball, volleyball, basketball, etc. and to drive a car was taken away when I was 7 years old and on the sideWALK, courtesy of an incompetent driver. My two classmates were killed by this driver. If you see me you will have no idea that I have permanent damage to my optic nerve and have had over 100 concussions as the result of my visual impairment.

  • Emma C

    If someone printed fliers pointing out how muni services are contracting and charging more yet again, with a printed letter on the back to the MTA saying they should find alternate means of closing the gap, (i.e. parking meters, parking passes, paycheck cuts), and people could sign the bottom of the letter and mail it in, who would they mail it to? The MTA office?

  • It appears to me that the “budget gap” is due to the state continuing to slash and burn its funding for public transit. It’s the state’s way of pushing its budget pain down to the cities and towns. It’s not temporary, and it’s not a San Francisco problem per se, though it has become ours now. The obvious solution is for the state to have the guts to do the right thing and raise the gas tax to pay for transit. This would have the added benefit of prodding people to drive less and drive more efficient vehicles, which is what they need to do anyway. Cutting public transit is not only short-sighted, stupid, and a guaranteed way to further reduce our tax base, in this day and age it could even be called a crime against humanity. Certainly a crime against the future.

    1.) Climate change is real and accelerating faster than anyone thought possible even two years ago. Public transit is one of the most potent tools we have to combat it. We must lure people out of their cars, not push them back into them by reducing service. $17 million is nothing–peanuts. Geithner gives that much to bankers each time he breathes. Anyone want to hazard a guess how much it will cost us to relocate SFO when it goes under water? In my mind, it makes eminent sense for our national economic “stimulus” to be spent on preserving public transit. It preserves jobs and is so shovel-ready it doesn’t even need a shovel. Perhaps in some alternate universe it makes sense to build roads while cutting public transit, but not this one. (The Central Subway makes no sense in any conceivable universe.)

    2.) Public transit is vital to San Francisco’s economy, and it will soon be vital to every other town that hopes to have an economic pulse. As the national economy sputters, as unemployment continues to creep upwards, as people become fundamentally poorer because of the colossally badly-managed financial mess, many, many people are no longer going to be able to afford to insure and maintain a car. (Last year, Americans shed a net of 4 million cars, the first time we’ve seen a decrease in car ownership in this country ever.) Then, as Peak Oil begins to bite in earnest, cars are going to become what they once were–a luxury item owned only by a subset of the population. This future is not all that far off. Preparing for this transition by decimating public transit now is the worst possible course to take. Cities and towns that have public transit will have a work force able to get to work. Far flung suburbs will be abandoned. Places without public transit will be toast or will be scrambling to slap a system together with no money and no resources.

    3.) We face an enormous transition ahead of us. I hope it’s only a restructuring of our economy, our energy sources, and our consumer-oriented values along lines that are sustainable for the future of the planet. But this transition may be a lot more. It may be something both difficult and dark. Because San Francisco is fairly energy-efficient, because it is bikeable and walkable, because we have an educated, creative citizenry, and because we have public transit, we actually have a better chance than many places of making it through the next decade relatively intact. We may come out the other side with higher density, cleaner air, healthier citizens, community gardens, liveable streets, and a biotech industry that generates at least some tax base. Other places won’t be so lucky. There may be riots, cars torched, entire neighborhoods abandoned and bulldozed to the ground. (Seen pictures of Detroit lately?) There will likely be scapegoating, anger, and acts of stupidity we will all regret. Though it will help nothing, people will damage their own communities to express their rage. In order to maintain social cohesion that will benefit everyone, regardless of economic class, we need to make sure we have the structures in place that allow people to meet their basic needs and convinces them beyond a doubt that it’s in their best interest to keep the city functioning rather than attack it. And public transit is so very vital to this. Effective and efficient public transit knits and joins a city together and creates a covenant between a government and its people. Dirty, crowded, infrequent public transit creates alienation and rage.

    What needs to be done? We need to yell and howl at a city, state and national level. I am writing my city supervisor, the mayor, my state rep and state senator,the governor, my congresswoman, and my senators. (Please note, there are other sources of funds besides parking meters,though I’m not opposed to raising the rates or placing bunches of them in GG park.)

    Writing, emailing, phone calls, and showing up at meetings may not be enough. The depth of belief in the primacy of auto-centric life may be too deep. Still, even though marching against invading Iraq didn’t work, when lunacy strikes, you have to make a stand.

  • joe lewis

    Why is it that I see all the public transportation systems packed with tired, unhappy commuters…..

    And whenever I pass a public transit corporation yard, I see all the staff headed out the gate at the end of the day IN THEIR OWN PRIVATE VEHICLES… ??

    Oh, yeah. I see a few “green” types who think they’re changing the world by riding out on their commuter bicycles. But 95% of ALL public transit employees drive their own cars.

    All the while, they advertise that we, the public, should “spare the air” and such… and pack ourselves into their system… to keep them in their jobs.

  • JC

    One thing for Greg (love NJudah Chron) or this site’s guru – on downward spiral concerns, I will note that I was pretty surprised that the MTA’s budget numbers in terms of fare revenue for the year was apparently spot on. Meaning that they’ve apparently gotten really good at forecasting ridership. Frankly, almost unbelievably good. I would have thought that the various changes made this year would have negatively impacted the expected revenues but it doesn’t appear to have done so. Unless they’ve cleverly hid the deficits.

  • friscotowner

    Why not privatize muni? Really, folks, it should be crystal clear that a town with a $6.6 BILLION dollar budget cant’ even run a simple transit system. It’s simply not a priority. Why hassle with Muni when you can drive?

    Every time the city “needs” money to fund another climate czar position or some non-profit, it (the mayor) dips into muni. This town isn’t “progressive” or “liberal” it’s simply dysfunctional. The budget “crisis” is the new normal.

    Why bother calling your supervisor, the mayor or anyone else- if they haven’t listened or can’t see what’s going on by now, they either won’t or don’t want to. They’re all too busy with their own myopic agendas, be it illegal “workers”, pets being declawed or non-binding resolutions that are useless. They’re not there for you, perhaps it’s time the voters realized this.

  • Workers at MUNI and the City Attorneys loves the cable cars. They generate the most accidents for the 26 cars that are run daily. Rain are shine, tourists or not, they must run ‘on schedule’ required by the Charter amendment passed by the voters to Mrs. Klussman’s glee.They can never keep a schedule because there’s no way the operator can pass to make up time. MUNI uses transit operators at union scale. Disney enterprises hire P/T and seasonal workers at much lower pay. Losses at The CC are hidden in MUNI’s budget sheets. No one dare criticize its operation. Even the Mayor quickly pulled in his horns on CC fare collection.
    rayfquan@sbcglobal.net

  • lacadaz

    Everyone is up in arms in the comments. I gave up my car 4 years ago and am pretty much exclusive on Muni (3 or 4 cabs a month). I guess I want to know what other way to get around the city for less than $100 there is. A parking space where I live $200, where I work $150, $200 car payment and $150 in insurance and a couple hundred for gas seem pretty conservative. A cab to work is $20 a day. Why would I bitch about paying anything under $100 rather than $500 to $1000 as an alternative? Every Muni line operates at a loss. Why shouldn’t we pay what the service is worth? What is wrong with the people in this city?

  • @friscotowner – Privatizing mass-transit is a terrible idea because so many of the fiscal benefits of the system are not accrued at the fare box but are instead accrued in real estate values, commute efficiency, environmental efficiency, and in other indirect means. The tragedy of the commens ensures that business will not directly pay for this benefit. Mass transit is a classic case of a service that is best provided by the government and operated at a sustainable loss.

    There are other fringe social benefits for public transit, not the least of which is providing otherwise immobile citizens with the option to increase their mobility and better participate in society.

  • Which would you prefer? A $5 ride on the F-line or the discontinuation of the F-line and the current F-line Historic Streetcars running on an extended J-line?

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Muni Operators Vote to Reject Concessions Proposal

|
Muni drivers rejected a concessions proposal today that would have saved dozens of operator jobs while reducing Muni service cuts and fare increases. Members of the Transport Workers Union Local 250A voted down the proposal negotiated between TWU President Irwin Lum, MTA management, and the Mayor. Had the operators accepted the proposal, it would have […]

MTA Releases Revised Budget Proposal, List of Muni Service Cuts

|
Flickr photo: Steve Rhodes The Municipal Transportation Agency has released a revised budget proposal for the 2009-2010 fiscal year that calls for eliminating up to nine bus routes, and scaling back service on as many as 29 routes, including some popular lines, in a series of cost-cutting moves that would help Muni close a $129 […]