Demand a Truly Transit-First Muni Budget: Say NO to Balancing the Budget on the Backs of Transit Riders!

Rather than balancing the MTA budget deficit with service cuts and fare increases, it's time the MTA ask motorists to pay their fair share. Here's how you can help:

1. CALL OR E-MAIL THE MAYOR AND THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: Let the Mayor and the Board of Supervisors know that you oppose balancing the MTA budget on the backs of transit riders and that they should reject any MTA budget that doesn't call on motorists to pay their fair share to drive and park in San Francisco. Ask them to reject the MTA's budget and until the MTA can pass a truly Transit-First budget ("Budget Scenario 2"). Sample language and contact information is below. If you send an e-mail, please also cc TLC (jeremy at livablecity.org).

Sample language:

Board of Supervisors' phone numbers and e-mail addresses are:

2. WRITE LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Personalize your point of view based on your experience as a transit rider, alternative-transportation user, or driver, in a letter to the editor of one of the local media outlets. Be sure to check out the submission guidelines for each publication via the links provided below. Consider some of these facts from the 2000 census:

• 28% of SF residents don't own a car and have few if any alternatives to taking Muni for their transportation needs.
• 50% of people commute without a private vehicle, and the city should be encouraging, rather than discouraging, more of this kind of behavior.
• Nearly 70% commute by more sustainable modes, including transit, walking, carpooling, bicycling, and motorcycling.

As a multimodal agency, MTA should be advancing sustainable transportation over driving in San Francisco. However, a fare increase could have several potential negative effects on the sustainability of MTA's budget:

• When fares go up, people who can afford to drive stop taking transit. As the roads become more congested with private vehicles, transit operations become less efficient and costlier to operate per trip served. Conversely, when transit operations become more efficient, operating costs are reduced, while service improves, attracting more riders and more fare revenue. With Muni's own numbers, TLC calculated that saving 5 minutes on each run of the 14-Mission (which currently must battle heavy traffic and double-parked vehicles on Mission St.) would save Muni $214,000 per year in operation costs on just that one line.
• A fare increase may still fall short of closing the budget gap because when fares go up, those who cannot afford to drive take fewer trips. Far from guaranteeing MTA new revenue, a fare hike jeopardizes MTA's budget with continued shortfalls if ridership declines too steeply. Studies show that if transit fares increase by 40% (to $1.75, which MTA is considering), ridership can be expected to fall by up to 16%.
• Muni is still well short of the 85% on-time performance goal mandated by 1999's Prop. E. MTA should not willingly promote driving (which degrades transit performance) over transit service until Muni improves its 70% performance level, which has not improved in several years.

Even if you own and drive a car in San Francisco, say that as a motorist you're committed to creating a better multimodal transportation system for all San Franciscans, and you're willing to pay your fair share after transit riders shouldered a 25% fare increase in 2003, especially since the cost of driving has not increased since then. As a driver, say you're willing to pay more at city-run parking garages, at meters, and for Residential Parking Permits (or include some of TLC's alternative revenue sources that you'd be willing to pay for) rather than having MTA raise fares again.

SF Chronicle
E-mail: letters@sfchronicle.com
Submission guidelines

SF Examiner
E-mail: letters@examiner.com
Submission guidelines

SF Bay Guardian
E-mail: letters@sfbg.com
Submission guidelines

SF Weekly
Submission guidelines and web form