Horrible Budget Ideas from the Geniuses at Muni (SFMTA)

On February 4th, the SFMTA Board of Directors had a special meeting covering various issues and topics.  One of the topics they covered is the upcoming fiscal year budget by showing a PowerPoint presentation.  Thanks to the public disclosure laws, we are able to view the materials the board gets to see.

To view the budget presentation, click here.

A lot of the material was all blah blah blah that wouldn't matter to me, but I found a chunk of information that made me quite frustrated that SFMTA employees would try to make the Board even think about accepting.

If anyone recalled the Mayor Frank Jordan era, Muni decided to implement a new fare structure where passengers had to pay an extra 50 cent fee to ride express buses or pay for a premium Muni pass, and eliminated all transfers.  The citizens hated it so much that Muni decided months later to restore transfers and kill the premium fees for all express buses.

So here's the stuff that made me go nuts:

Page 10: Automatic Indexing
The SFMTA is going to raise the price of its fare products by 3% for the 2015 and 2016 fiscal years.  What this basically means is your Muni fare will increase from $2 to $2.25 ($0.75 to $1 for youth, seniors, and disabled), and monthly passes will rise two dollars for adults and one dollar for discount passes.  Some of the fare products like visitor passports and cable car fares will remain the same.

#Muni wants to consider making the F-Market equal to the Cable Car single ride fare ($6). Are you FUCKING NUTS?
— Akit (@AgentAkit) February 5, 2014

Pages: 15 and 16: Possible Revenue Sources
I thought they've gone insane by proposing these ideas to generate extra money:

1. They want to raise the price of riding the F-Market historic streetcar line.  On top of the regular Muni fare, a premium surcharge will be $1 per adult, and $0.50 discount for eligible people.
2. Or instead of a surcharge, one idea is to charge passengers the equivalent fare that Cable Car passengers pay at $6 per single ride on the F-Market.
3. For passengers who ride the limited lines and peak express bus lines, a surcharge on top of the regular single ride Muni fare of $1 for adults and $0.50 discount for eligible passengers.
4. A policy to ban "M" Muni Only adult passes to ride the limited and express bus lines, therefore forcing those passengers to either pay for a "A" Muni premium pass or pay the FULL MUNI FARE + SURCHARGE if they only have the "M" pass.
5. A plan to increase visitor passport fares by $1 or $5.
6. A plan to increase the "A" pass $2 above indexed price due to BART's increased cost for rides within San Francisco.

However, since the Clipper card would be responsible for many of the fare and pass transactions, it will come at a big cost to Muni to modify the fare structure.  They estimate it will cost more than $250,000 to have the Clipper software rewritten with the new rules, but also have to tackle the Title VI equity analysis.

#Muni also wants to charge extra fare for express buses & limited lines? Or if you have "M" pass, pay FULL FARE?  Are you FUCKING HIGH?
— Akit (@AgentAkit) February 5, 2014

Pages 17 to 20: Possible Revenue Reductions
So by raising money (as seen above), the agency also wants to lose money in their real stupid ideas:

1. The SFMTA wants to continue the free Muni for youth program at an expense of $2.7 million for the 2015 fiscal year, and $2.8 million for the 2016 fiscal year.
2. The agency also wants to extend the free Muni for youth program to include 18 year olds which will balloon the program's expenses to $3.6 million for 2015 FY, and $3.7 million for 2016 FY.
3. If the agency considers number two, they will also have to rewrite what "youth fare" means for passengers.  By redefining it to say it's good for 18 year old passengers, Muni is expected to lose up to $2.1 million in fare revenue.
4. If the agency decides to eliminate Sunday meter parking fees, the loss would be about $9.3 to $9.5 million a year in revenue.  This takes into account the agency's estimated 'cost savings' for killing the Sunday meter program.
5. If a proposal to give free Muni to seniors and disabled passengers is approved, upon the assumption that 50% of citizens are eligible, Muni is going to lose at least $4 million in revenue, and if it's increased to 67% are eligible, Muni is going to lose at least $6 million.

Free #Muni for seniors where up to 50 to 60% would qualify?  You got to be kidding.  75 cents a ride is damn cheap. Cost program: $4M to 6M.
— Akit (@AgentAkit) February 5, 2014

Akit's Angry Opinions
I've never seen such stupid ideas in my life.  So let's go down the list of their bad ideas.

1. New adult fare at $2.25 a ride will definitely slow down the system for passengers paying the farebox; although, the agency would consider giving passengers who pay with Clipper a fare discount as a way to encourage more usage and speed boarding times.
2. I really don't like the idea of charging any premium fee for the F-Market route, especially for those who live near the F-Market line along the Embarcadero.  Why punish the average citizen who can't afford the parking rates and make them pay extra to get to their house or workplace?  The F-Market has been the perfect alternative for visitors and citizens to get to Fisherman's Wharf without paying the insane Cable Car single fare fee of $6 a ride.
3. What I hate even more is if Muni charges a $6 fee for the F-Market, equal to the Cable Car fare.  If anyone recalls the 74X CultureBus, a premium Muni bus service, they were charging a very high premium fare of $7 a ride (went up to $10), and because of the high fare for passengers, died a horrible death because of severe lack of ridership.
4. I am very against the idea of making all limited lines and peak express lines a premium fare service.  If anyone recalls this, I reported back in 2010 that Muni attempted to make the express lines a premium fare service and rejecting "M" passes, but finally decided in September 2010 to not go forward with the idea.  Some people have to commute long distances on Muni, and the limited and peak express buses helps get them to their destination in a respective amount of time.  If there's a premium fee, it will force people who can't afford the extra cost to take the much slower local buses.  But how about the people who live west of 43rd Avenue and Geary?  The only bus line from 48th Avenue to 43rd is the 38L-Geary Limited inbound line, and will you force the elderly and disabled who live deep in the Outer Richmond district to walk several blocks just to save money?
5. If Muni says okay to a premium fare for limited or express buses, I'm very against having "M" pass passengers get their passes rejected and being forced to pay the regular fare PLUS the premium fee.  At least give these people some respect by either honoring the pass and charging a small surcharge or honor the pass as full fare with premium.
6. I've never liked the idea of giving out free passes to kids.  I applauded the MTC board for saying screw you to the kids on the idea of spending public money for free rides for the youth, only to have the SFMTA board decide to spend its own cash for the pilot program.  And the youth responded by humiliating themselves in the news media by getting angry (here, take a look at a Chronicle picture of a kid so upset he's not getting free rides on the bus).  Renewing the program comes at a huge expense to us taxpayers.  Remember kids, the price you pay for Muni rides today is the best offer versus all the other major transit agencies in the Bay Area.  And, you get a FREE TRANSFER.
7. Oh, and let's not forget the idea to give seniors and disabled passengers free rides too.  Where do you think that money comes from?  The public's pockets.  I wonder how many people will try to fraud Muni and the MTC who issues the disabled IDs.  Get a crooked doctor to sign-off paperwork and why not apply for a shot a free rides on Muni for life?  Sounds similar to people who cheat the disabled parking placard system.
8. Last but not least, let's talk about the end of the Sunday meter fees.  I think charging for Sunday meters is a great idea because business districts gets more turnover (more customers), there's more available parking, and for anyone who doesn't want to pay the meter fees, can opt to ride Muni as an alternative.  When Sunday meters was free, visiting neighborhoods with major parking issues like Irving Street from 19th to 27th Avenue was horrible; cars wouldn't move for hours and some people would double park forever waiting like a vulture for an open space.  So keep the Sunday meters running.

A lot of times, Muni's 'smart people' likes to rattle the cage and think of these harebrained ideas, including restoring programs like charging a premium fee for express buses when it utterly failed in mere months over 20 years ago.  Some of these ideas won't likely be implemented because it will anger the public, but some might fly without a doubt like continuing to give the kids free rides.

When Muni pulls these ideas out of their ass, I'm very grumpy.  I would spit on their grave if there was one (can anyone find the CultureBus gravestone?), but for now, it's just ranting on this blog.

If you feel the need to express your opinions about Muni's ideas to raise money and give out more free crap, contact your city supervisor.

SFMTA (Muni) Invites Public to Meetings - But We Cannot Review Documents & Comments Email Address Doesn't Work

On late Friday afternoon around 5:20PM, I received an e-mail from the SFMTA inviting members of the public to review their draft document which could affect Muni with major service changes and fares.  Under federal law, public transit agencies must do a review under Title VI requirements of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

I've mentioned about Title VI before, when the Clipper card program wanted to impose a change to include a fee for obtaining a new card.  Read the story here.

Here's the e-mail message for you to read:

When you look at the letter, it mentioned that the agency created a draft of new or revised policies due to a change in the Title VI requirements by the FTA.  It gives a link to the FTA document to review the federal changes, and the SFMTA will be presenting their "draft policy" at upcoming meetings on June 22nd and June 25th.

I was interested in reviewing what the SFMTA drafted regarding possible changes for Muni, so I went to the bottom of the message and clicked on the link, but it referred me to the SFMTA search results page and not the website.  I even hand typed the address, including the "titleVIcomments" and still received the search page and no actual SFMTA Title VI website.

Thinking that this must be a mistake, I used their email address: TitleVIcomments@SFMTA.com.  I wrote that there's no SFMTA draft document to review, suggested a new e-mail be sent to the correct SFMTA website, and asked for a response within a week

Here's the response from the SFMTA, and it was a really quick response:

Click on image above to enlarge.

Yep... EMAIL ADDRESS DOESN'T EXIST.  That's pretty disappointing.

This has three huge issues:

1. Why is the website link to the SFMTA website not going to the location of the document?
2. If people just attend these public meetings without spending some time prior to review the document online so they can give proper comments to the SFMTA representatives and the Board of Directors, isn't that a violation of public hearing/meeting laws, or something like that?
3. If people cannot e-mail comments because the e-mail address doesn't exist, is that also a violation of public hearing laws because the public cannot write to the agency?

I'm going to contact SFMTA's press department for further information.  I'll post an update when I get a reply.

SFMTA Should Reject Spending $1.6 Million for Free Youth Passes in Light of Muni Metro Meltdown

UPDATE: SFMTA Board approved giving free passes to youth, instead of investing money towards keeping Muni running, especially since the meltdown.  Big frown!  Read Tweet from Muni.

Original posting: Yesterday was one of Muni's worst days ever with two major incidents: a passenger being dragged over 500 feet when struck by a F-Market streetcar, and the meltdown of Muni metro.

Muni Metro serves tens of thousands of people every single workday, and a transformer at the Van Ness station practically ended all tunnel service within the city, therefore forcing city buses to take the brunt of transporting riders from West Portal to Embarcadero.  Muni blames the transformer on the weekend's heavy rains for ruining the commute after 6PM, but fortunately service is restored to the light rail system for the morning commute.

Today at 1PM in City Hall, the SFMTA Board of Directors will be having their last meeting of the year, and I'm betting the board and citizens on the microphone will be ranting about the disruption of Muni metro.  Some will put blame on the weather while others will put blame on the neglect and deferred maintenance now punishing the city.

Also on the agenda is the board will be voting on $1.6 million in grant funding from the MTC to provide free Muni youth passes for those who qualify.  The rest of the grant money ($5.1 million) will be going towards a rehabilitation of the light rail vehicles. (View PDF of proposal here)

Other than my views of using taxpayer money to fund free rides for kids (I deeply oppose any free rides for kids), in light of the major Muni metro meltdown last night, I want the SFMTA Board to reject the $1.6 million in funding and change the proposal to spend that money to fixing the critical infrastructure of Muni in order to maintain operational status.

While I know $1.6 million won't solve all our problems, at least fixing certain critical components such as making sure the electrical transformers for Muni metro won't explode is more important because the metro service serves a bigger population, and not just kids who might be eligible for a free pass.  I depend on Muni metro on days when I go to the ballpark, and many of you depend on it to bring you fast service to your workplace in downtown.

What would you spend $1.6 million?  Making sure Muni works for all, or give free passes for kids?

I'd make sure Muni works for all.  And for you kids, be lucky Muni gives the BIGGEST DISCOUNT for youth passengers versus other agencies in the Bay Area.

• Muni: $2 adult, $0.75 youth (62.5% discount) with free transfer.
• Samtrans: $2 adult, $1.25 youth (37.5% discount) with no transfer.
• VTA: $2 adult, $1.75 youth (12.5% discount) with no transfer.
• AC Transit: $2.10 adult, $1.05 youth (50% discount) with additional $0.25 for one ride transfer.

 I've made my point.  REJECT FREE PASSES FOR KIDS.

Free Muni on December 28th? SFMTA Board Votes Tuesday

I was looking around the SFMTA/Muni website and reviewed the agenda documents for the SFMTA Board of Directors meeting that will be happening this Tuesday, December 4th.

Other than the controversial free passes for youth proposal (at $1.6 million) on Tuesday's program, agenda item 10.8 sparked some interest...

The SFMTA Board of Directors are going to vote on a proposal for free Muni rides on Friday, December 28th, 2012.  You heard that right, free rides on all Muni lines, including the $5 $6 per ride Cable Cars.

Why the free rides?  It's Muni's birthday, but not just any usual birthday, it's their 100th.  Back in 1912, the city's Muni service was born and after 100 years, now provides over 200 million passenger trips a year.

The SFMTA considered an alternative to have the fare at five cents, but are not recommending as it is more difficult to execute.

If all goes well, the SFMTA Board will approve this and you'll be able to enjoy going around the city fare free!

Akit's Opinions:
I personally think this is a great idea to give free rides for a day to celebrate the agency's 100th anniversary.  It's great for those who are enjoying their time-off, but also gives thanks to those still needing to take public transit to work on the last Friday of the year.

While it may be free, if the city has learned a lesson from the Spare the Air free transit rides, it could possibly slow down bus lines as more people would just take a bus and just get off at the next stop simply because it's free.  Others complained it turns into a moving homeless shelter.  But since it's very late into the year, Muni's passenger loads should be lower.

Five cents or not?  I believe charging five cents has its logistics and cost issues, including the need to print thousands of paper transfers and making sure the Clipper card equipment is modified for that one day.  At least when it's free, you won't have fare inspectors writing $100 citations for failure to pay a nickel fare.

Muni Considers Ending BART Plus Relationship - Another Nail in the Coffin?

Last week Friday, the SFMTA had a hearing to consider ending Muni's relationship in the BART Plus program.  While this is not yet official, it would still have to go under the Board of Directors for a final vote.

For those of you not familiar with BART Plus, here's how it works:
BART Plus is a combination of a BART ticket with privileges to ride neighboring public transit agencies (a flash pass).  The ticket has varying price points and is sold on a twice monthly basis with the "A" and "B" tickets valid for the first fifteen days and the last fourteen to sixteen days.

Passengers using BART Plus gets some nice perks: The 'last ride' bonus will let passengers with less than enough credit on their BART ticket funds get to ride one last time regardless of how much the fare is; the ticket is returned to the passenger so it can be used as a flash pass.  The flash pass portion is valid with multiple transit agencies as a local fare credit.

AC Transit Killed Their Relationship
The biggest hit to BART Plus was the end of acceptance on AC Transit in 2003; a major connection for BART passengers within the East Bay.  The only discount BART and AC Transit passengers receives today is the 25 cent discount when transferring from BART to AC and vice versa using a Clipper card.

Muni's Relationship is Tender
Muni is one of the busiest transit agencies in the entire Bay Area, especially when comparing the high number of passes sold every month versus other agencies that operates in larger counties.  BART Plus and Muni plays a vital role for passengers to save money while being able to commute just using one ticket.  This is especially true for passengers that may have to ride more than just Muni and BART to get to work by combining everything into one.

But How About Clipper?
BART Plus can never convert to Clipper until all the agencies under the Plus ticket can have Clipper card readers installed, so the old fashioned ticket will still be in existence.  Muni claims that they have to end their relationship because of the agency's goal to end paper passes and convert everything into Clipper.

Akit's Opinion
BART Plus is the first of its kind to be a multi-agency transit pass integrated with BART access.  If you are to compare other agencies with their pass agreements, the second best is Caltrain with their 2+ zone monthly pass giving passengers access to Samtrans and VTA at no extra charge, and an optional discounted Muni pass.  Other agency agreements like Muni's "A" pass only gives Muni passengers access to BART.

It's been the MTC's dream for a Clipper card monthly pass that can access ALL transit agencies for one flat price, but that dream may never come to fruition because of the numerous transit agencies running in the Bay Area.  BART Plus' old agreements makes that dream real for passengers and saves them tons of money to get around the Bay Area with relative ease, even though it's not compatible with the Clipper card.

Ending Muni's relationship will be a major setback for BART Plus.  Losing AC Transit was bad enough, but Muni may kill BART Plus, or at least put another nail in the coffin.  I think Muni's statement about trying to end all paper passes is a bunch of junk; they will make plenty of BART Plus passengers angry and the public knows Muni is being greedy by asking for people to fork over more money.

Why can't we all just get along with each other?  The Bay Area transit agencies should be playing nice with each other with generous transfer and pass agreements making it easier for everyone to ride one agency to another.  Instead, each one wants to be Mr. Tough Guy and force us passengers to pay more.  A lot of the transfer agreements is a bunch of crap; 25 cents here, 50 cents there; it's not much.  Caltrain, Samtrans, and VTA have a really cool transfer agreement for those who rides Caltrain with 2+ zone monthly pass, so why can't other agencies work on an decent agreement that works for their passengers?

Lastly, here's a reason why the Clipper card goes through so much hell and is probably one of the most complicated fare card systems in the entire nation or possibly the world; each individual transit agency has their own fare rules, transfer rules, inter-agency rules, and pass rules that makes it so much more difficult for tourists or possibly the average citizen to understand.  The MTC made one huge mistake: They allowed the Clipper card to absorb the grandfathered rules that makes no sense, such as the 8-ride Caltrain ticket, instead of working on better solutions like changing it to a 10-ride or an across the board 50 cent fare discount whenever you transfer between one agency.

Maybe if transit agencies played nice with each other, they can help get more cars off the road, and with increasing passenger loads, show to the state and federal governments that they need more funding to meet demand so more buses and trains can be operating.

Baby Stroller Policy on Muni - No Bulky & Unfoldable Strollers

First of all, happy Friday to everyone on this gorgeous day here in San Francisco. I hope your Easter weekend will go well.

A person on Twitter asked for my views on the possible change in the baby stroller policy for Muni:

@AgentAkit I'd love to see your response to this sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/04/04/2-s…

— Dori (@creativecstasy) April 6, 2012

Currently, drivers have the discretion to allow or not allow strollers on their vehicles, and when a passenger is denied boarding, that has created some frustration.

Current policy requires the child to be removed from the stroller and for the stroller to be folded-up. But with the new bigger, strollers that don't fold, and ones that do but takes up too much space, it seems drivers are booting more families from Muni vehicles on a more frequent basis.

Two city Supervisors believes this problem is discouraging families to ride public transit, therefore the decline in the number of children in our city.

What do I think about this?
I don’t agree with a universal city policy that a driver has to enforce, I believe independent judgment by the driver is the best policy because it’s the operators that have the ultimate responsibility to make sure all passengers are safe.

There’s multiple concerns with allowing strollers to ride Muni:

• Safety of the baby or toddler in the stroller. Strollers may move during motion of the vehicle, therefore if a driver has to slam their brake, the baby could fly out of the stroller.
• Some of you may be thinking, why not give them the wheelchair space? That’s a bad idea because that space is reserved for a wheelchair passenger, and those wheelchair areas take up three or four seats for passengers; should a stroller get the wheelchair spot? No because it takes up extra seats.
• Wheelchairs do have a designated spot by federal law, and all buses have straps to secure the wheelchair, but while Muni does not regularly do it, other agencies do as policy to secure both wheels with special hooks attached to the floor, have the wheelchair brakes locked in, and a seat belt around their waist. Strollers don’t have the ability because the seat belt might go around their neck, and the hooks on the ground may not be able to safely secure the stroller.
• Wheelchair lifts and ramps for streetcars are definitely not for strollers, they are for people who are disabled or have limited mobility.

My biggest concern:
The “SUV” carriages we see with the larger rubber wheels and bigger frames takes up too much space on Muni and removes precious aisle space for those who needs to stand or pass by to board/exit the vehicle. Ones that can’t fold takes up too much space and should be banned, but even the ones that can fold and still take a huge amount of bulk should be banned too.

As a courtesy to passengers, it’s discouraged to bring huge bulky items on Muni (for the exception of medical devices like wheelchairs, and walkers). You know what I’m talking about, garbage bags full of cans, and suitcases. If you want to transport bulky items, call a taxi or drive.

The exception:
I don’t have a concern for strollers that fold and takes a minimal amount of space because they fold up so compactly, similar to carrying a poster tube.

Photo credits:
First photo by Flickr user: Paul Barter, using a Creative Commons License.
Second photo by Flickr user: 'andynash,' using a Creative Commons License.

What's Up with the Very Slow Muni Metro Rides in the Twin Peaks Tunnel?

How was your weekend? Mine good because I picked-up a couple of sandwiches at Ike's Place (I split a Menage a Trois & 'Hella' Fat Bastard sandwiches with a colleague), and went book shopping down at the liquidated Borders at the Westfield mall in downtown.

Whenever I want to head out to downtown, I park my car nearby St. Francis Circle and take Muni metro's K/T or M lines. But this weekend, the Muni metro was just flat out slow along the Twin Peaks tunnel between Forest Hill and Castro stations.

We all are used to the Twin Peaks tunnel stretch from those two stations and it's always been slow. I'd always feel the brakes kick in every several seconds and feel the train speed-up just briefly. One reason is that Nat Ford admitted during a SFMTA Board meeting the tracks are in poor condition, thereby the trains could not go full speed along the tracks. Back in my younger days about 15 years ago, the metro trains ran in manual, went full speed, and blazed down the Twin Peaks tunnel; but when the automatic system kicked-in and Muni started running the whale trains known as Bredas down the tracks at slower speeds, and it just continuously got slower and slower. But last weekend, it was super slow.

The worst segment is when the inbound metro trains are getting close to Castro station when the straight track starts to curve to the start of the Castro street platform. The trains are now running at a crawl speed vs. a much faster speed like before. It also runs extra slow going outbound from when it leaves Castro station to when it reaches the straight track segment. I've also noticed the trains running slower this weekend along the straight tracks to/from Forest Hill to/from the curve to the Castro station.

Gees Muni, so a big government agency says your trains and rails suck, so you run slower on that segment alone? The rest of the metro track segments on your automatic train system are running at its regular (fast) speeds. Fix the damn tracks or give me a good excuse of why I shouldn't just take BART more often.

Ending 25 Cent Fee for Muni Tickets Costs $2.13 Million Yearly

Since Friday, October 1st, the SFMTA stopped asking Muni metro patrons to pay a 25 cent surcharge per limited use ticket (LUT) issued by the new metro ticketing machines. This was a bright spot to many people as they complained the 25 cent fee was not fair, but I also argued the plastic Clipper cards issued by the same machines are given out with NO surcharge. To make it even sweeter, I reported the plastic Clipper cards will now be free until June 2011.

But have you ever thought, by Muni waiving the 25 cent fee to offset the re-loadable and reusable paper LUTs, the agency is falling into a deeper financial pit of financial doom?

In item #12 of yesterday's SFMTA Board of Directors meeting, the item is a request to continue the practice to waive the surcharges charged to the customers for the paper LUTs. There's some interesting facts which was discovered in the paperwork:

1. It was originally conceived that the surcharge would be 25 cents and be raised to 50 cents starting with the 2012 fiscal year.
2. Each card the SFMTA purchased was originally 35 cents each, however the cost to the agency for each card has dropped to 33 cents.
3. The revenue generated by forcing passengers to pay the surcharge would be about $1.4 million for charging 25 cents, and $2.8 million by charging 50 cents.

The worst part: If the SFMTA continues the policy to not charge a fee for each LUT issued and if their request to get reimbursed is denied by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the agency will have to spend approximately $2.13 million a year on the paper RFID cards.

I'd hate to be devil's advocate, but while the locals are celebrating the waiver of the fee and Muni will go into financial turmoil, why in the hell would people pay a 25 cent surcharge every 90 days for a brand new LUT when Clipper cards are totally free and have much less restrictive policies than the LUTs? Muni could save tons of money if people refused to buy LUTs and just obtained a Clipper card because each card costs $2.11 and comes out of the MTC's budget, not SFMTA/Muni's. Also, by owning a Clipper card for at least 2 years and 3 months, you made up the $2.11 value of the card versus paying a 25 cent surcharge to Muni every 90 days/3 months.

Lastly, here's some fun math to demonstrate how much wasted paper is needed for the vending machines to sell LUTs:

• Question: If it costs $2.13 million to supply the cards on a yearly basis, and they cost $0.33 each, how many cards does Muni buy per year?
• Answer: 6,454,545 (or just 6.5 million) cards are issued per year. What a waste of paper!
  

Photo by Flickr user: "jlkinsel" using a Creative Commons license.

Update: Muni's May 8th Service Cuts - Schedules Still Not Posted

As I reported on April 22nd, Muni announced their "10%" service cuts to many of its bus and rail lines, but argued that new time schedules and trip planning programs (Google Maps and 511) was not updated with the new information.

With less than one week left before major service changes are put into effect, the new time schedules and trip planning programming updates are not done.

• Time schedules: Muni refers everyone to 511.org where the time schedules are posted. At this current time, the time schedules have not been revised. To view a time schedule, use your address bar and type in: http://www.sfmta.com/ and after the slash, type in the bus line. For example: http://www.sfmta.com/18 and it will go automatically to 511's website for the 18-46th Avenue's bus schedule.
• Trip planning: For customized trip planning on Muni, people depend on 511.org's trip planning program and Google Map's public transit option. Both work equally well, but they have their issues with the service changes on Muni. 511 will provide you the pre-May 8th schedule even if you designate a future travel date of May 8th or after. For Google Maps, asking the system for a date on or after May 8th will result in an error.
  

This is not good for Muni. People need to prepare with ample time for upcoming service cuts. People do not like waiting or standing at a bus stop longer than necessary, and many depend on a time schedule or accurate information provided by trip planning programs for the fastest way to get from point A to B.

18-46th Avenue Spared from 30 Minute Frequencies (Except Late Night)

This is a bittersweet victory for those who ride the 18-46th Avenue and/or have also advocated to SFMTA to prevent the outrageous 30 minute frequencies (non-peak service hours) originally proposed in February by management to their board.

I wrote back on March 1st on my blog about the 18-46th Avenue by giving an in-depth look at how much the line has already changed (especially with the reroute via Balboa), and how ugly 30 minute frequencies would be to a line that serves various communities and a major higher educational institution. I have argued that by allowing Muni to force 30 minute frequencies on non-peak service hours, why should the line take a 33% cut, while others are getting next to nothing?

In today's bittersweet victory, Muni caved in, however... the 18 line did get get some cuts that are not as bad as originally planned. Let's take a look:

• Current weekday frequencies: Peak service - 15 minutes, mid-day service - 20 minutes, and late night - 20 minutes. Last bus just past midnight.
  
• Revised weekday frequencies: Peak service - 20 minutes, mid-day service - 25 minutes, evening - 25 minutes, and late night (at 11PM) - 30 minutes. Last bus at approximately 11:30PM.
• Current weekend frequencies: All hours - 20 minutes.
• Revised weekend frequencies: All hours - 25 minutes.

Service changes effective May 8, 2010. That's right folks, it's officially May 8th, while others have argued it's May 1st.

I'm still against any service frequency cuts to the 18-46th Avenue due to its importance to connect with major downtown lines, and being the sole service that serves the western edge of the city, the apartments on John Muir Drive and Lake Merced Hills, and the Janet Pomeroy Center. Since the changes to the 88-BART shuttle removing service to the secluded apartments at John Muir Drive, it has been a large impact on those commuters that now depend on their car or the (worsening) frequencies of the 18-46th Avenue bus line.

Be warned: 511 and Google Maps online trip planning program websites are not ready with Muni's frequency changes when you set the date on or after May 8th, 2010. Also, 511's time schedules are not published, so it is unknown of when buses will depart/arrive based on Muni's modified frequencies schedule.

It is my expectation that Muni will publish the new time schedules and have the trip planning programs ready with at least two weeks before changes happen. I will be watching Muni very carefully and publish updates as we approach "fail day."

To view the upcoming weekday and weekend frequency changes, click here.

New Muni Service Cuts in May - Akit Reminds Muni how they Failed Before

I'm a pretty well informed citizen of San Francisco. I read the news from various sources and keep up-to-date on my tweets; it's sad to see that our public transit agency wants to take a step backward in the wrong direction to hurt not just their customers, but send their overall reputation further down the grave that we call the "Central Subway."

I've heard word that there was a last minute long shot appeal to see if an environmental review was necessary to give the "10%" cut in services on Muni, yet I had a gut feeling that it wasn't going to go well; I was right, the board kicked it to the curb with a 7-4 vote.

What makes me even more frustrated is just how soon the "10%" cuts will actually happen. SF Weekly claims it will start May 1st, and the SF Gate's City Insider says May 8th; but regardless of what date it may be, May will be the worst in Muni's history.

How can Muni decide to take drastic cuts with so little notice? Does less than 17 days notice actually give Muni the balls to pull off a massive PR campaign to inform the public of their beloved transit service going to make drastic cuts?

Let me refresh Muni's memory on some blog entries that gained major attention for FAILURE TO PROVIDE AMPLE NOTICE:

1. When Muni announced their so-called 10% cuts at their board meeting, they specifically targeted the 18-46th Avenue in a showboat attempt to say that service will be reduced from 20 minutes to a whopping 30 minutes mid-day, evenings, and weekends. I wrote a very serious in-depth analysis on why it was not fair to discriminate the 18-46th Avenue with 33% cuts while others are getting less than 10%.
2. The most recent cuts happened on December 5, 2009, and I reported on November 24th that Muni has not made an effort to provide new published bus/train schedules in a timely manner and online planning programs were also not ready. This story alone spread like wildfire and it really caught Muni's attention very quickly.
3. On November 26th, two days after I reported the failure of map planning programs, Google Maps was ready.
4. On December 1st, just a few days away from the major changes, 511's online trip planner program was updated with Muni's changes, but there was no time schedules posted.
5. I also gave a brutal punishing to Muni for failure to provide ample notice of an adult pass hike that was scheduled for January 1st. On November 5, 2009, I argued it was not fair to give such late notice of a pass hike because it would affect people who need to update their payroll deduction for their commuter benefits program. Just few days later (November 8th), I caught Muni in the act of updating their website about the pass hike.

This is a serious warning to Muni management, do not make service cuts without giving the public ample notice. One month's notice is barely acceptable, but with only 17 days left until the new month, that's not enough time to publish a new schedule, and not enough time for the techies at Google and 511 to input the new data into their trip planning program.

You've already screwed-up December 5th's cuts, so why should be trust you to get the time schedules and trip planning software updates in a timely manner? This is especially true for me, the 18-46th Avenue passenger whose going to have to get the worst punishment while others who ride major lines may not even notice much of a difference.

Update:
Here's an additional posting showing evidence of Muni's PR failure: The PGA golf tournament at Harding Park where Muni only gave the public one day's notice of major bus re-routes for the 18-46th Avenue and (the former) 88-BART Shuttle. And even then, I did all the research and posted it faster than 511's alerts page.

Muni Board Rejects Idea to Make Express Buses and Cable Cars a Premium Service

I just got back from my vacation in Las Vegas and I was looking at my Twitter messages while waiting for the plane at the airport and found something quite interesting...

It's really great to hear the SFMTA board has decided to reject their plan to only allow the more expensive $70 adult fast pass to access express buses and Cable Cars; thereby letting the $60 "M" pass holders to still have the right to ride the expresses to work, and the Cable Cars for fun. (Read my reaction to the first time Muni proposed even more restrictions on the "M" pass)

While the adult citizens rejoice about preserving their right to ride all Muni lines on a less expensive pass, one issue is not clear: During an SFMTA meeting, board members mentioned that there would also be a premium version of the senior, youth, and disabled passes that would also separate the right to ride certain lines. It is likely based on the news article, the SFMTA won't make a premium version for this group of citizens. On the sad part of this news, these three categories are still getting a pass hike soon and was OK'd by the Board of Supervisors months ago.

I've always thought it was a stupid idea to force peak hour express bus and Cable Car passengers to pay more for services. The cheap folks would decide to take the limited or regular bus lines (instead of the express) to save $120 a year in exchange for a longer commute; on the flip side is there would be massive overcrowding on the regular and limited lines. It was even more insulting the SFMTA management proposed for "M" pass passengers to pay the FULL FARE for express and Cable Cars instead of a small fee (say 25 cents for express and $2 for Cable Cars).

It's good to be back home! Just to mention: The Las Vegas transit system SUCKS. I waited 45 minutes for a bus on the strip and only one came by and I couldn't board because it was full. While waiting, I counted over a dozen going the other way. I finally gave up and took the damn monorail which is much faster but more expensive.

SFMTA Customer Service Center Service Fees - I Refuse to Pay

I was taking a look at the Muni updates section of the SFMTA website and it states the following:

"Effective April 1, 2010, there is a $3 fee charged at the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) Customer Service Center for the following services:

-- paying parking and transit citations.
-- purchasing fare media (except Senior/Disabled Pilot Pass and Lifeline Pass).
-- purchasing Parking Cards.
-- enrolling in Project 20."

Great... another way to steal money from the public. In my opinion, this idea totally sucks.

There are very few places that actually has all the Muni media available in one place, and now they want to nail you with a $3 surcharge? The SFMTA customer service center is one of only a few places in the city that accepts COMMUTER CHECK VOUCHERS.

Let's also remember that if you purchase Muni token tickets with commuter vouchers (for those folks who don't need to use Muni every single day), you are definitely screwed. The SFMTA customer service center is the only place in the city that you can buy it, plus, you now get F***ED in the ass paying a $3 fee too.

It makes me curious... say I'm the manager of a summer camp of 50 kids, so now I'd have to pay an extra $150 in service fees just so I can buy the passes? No grocery store in the city would even be able to sell 50 passes of the same type; only the SFMTA customer service center has the stockpile.

This is your way to make more money? What a joke.

SFMTA CHIEF NATANIEL FORD: RESIGN NOW. GET OUT OF OFFICE.

The Muni Transfer Debate... A Big Mess Every Time

Muni transfers have always been a center of debate when there's a budget crisis for the agency.

Transfers have been an important part of our city's transit system for many decades (even before I was born).

The last time Muni really took action on transfers is during the Frank Jordan era when transfers were completely eliminated (the POP system never existed back then) and riding from one part of town to the other and transferring would cost double or triple the regular fare. But... the city repealed the policy after the citizens got really ticked-off.

Just yesterday, the SFMTA was considering to charge a 50 cent fee for transfers. People were in panic on the comment boards on SFGate, but just hours later, an updated piece of news came out that the SFMTA decided to not charge for transfers.

But let's remember that the transfers debate could return at anytime. Muni could decide to put the issue back on the table by proposing a fee for transfers or completely eliminating them, but there are major consequences for charging or wiping-out those slips of paper.

Here's what would happen if Muni charged or eliminated transfers:

• The "proof of payment" system is dead. Passengers now have the choice to pay the fare and not get a transfer; since that piece of paper is supposed to be a fare receipt, the fare inspectors cannot enforce the rules.
• Illegal back door boarding (fare evasion) will get even worse since fare inspectors can't really do their primary job.
• Passengers would sell their non-expired transfers to others (an illegal act) or give them away to someone else.
• On the brighter end... those fare inspectors can actually enforce a major problem, rear door boarding should be stopped or they should check fares to allow back door boarding so the vehicle can leave faster.

But one thing definitely will happen in September 2011, say goodbye to paper transfers and hello to TransLink/Clipper.

An In-Depth Look Into Muni's 18-46th Avenue

The 18-46th Avenue is the line I take to get from my home in the Outer Richmond district to my job at SF State. I also took this line as a graduate and undergrad at State, and frequently took this line when going to City College (via the 29-Sunset). It was known as one of the best bus lines in the city, and was extremely desirable for the most senior Muni operators for the easy to drive route, happy passengers, and great views. For the passengers, this bus line was always on-time, reliable, and able to connect with many major lines heading towards downtown.

But after the major re-route on December 5, 2009, the line's reputation has gone down the gutter. I never see the same bus driver every single time, the on-time reliability has dropped drastically, and the morale of the passengers is really low.


Problem 1: It's not a community service route.
As you see on this weekday grid provided by Muni, the 18-46th Avenue is receiving the worst service reduction out of the rest of the lines. Service is being reduced from 20 minute frequencies to 30 minutes (mid-day weekday, weekday evenings, and all-day on Saturdays and Sundays).

Why is it the worst? Look at the mid-day weekday time changes: the 18 is going to be cut back 10 minutes while many other lines are only getting a cutback of an average of 3 minutes (5 minutes for the 33 and 37). Also, no other lines (other than the 18) are being reduced to 30 minute frequencies.

As you look at the grid, you will notice the lines currently operating mid-day with 30 minute frequencies are the lines considered "community service" and typically runs the 30-foot hybrid buses and specifically drive within a certain neighborhood or smaller zone versus buses that drive miles covering multiple neighborhoods/areas.

By doing a reduction in the 18's service to 30-minute frequencies, it's like turning the line into a "community service" line instead of it's true nature, a crosstown route like its brother, the 29-Sunset. How can Muni punish the 18? This line is the only lifeline serving the far west end of the city, and is the sole bus route route to access the Janet Pomeroy Center, Legion of Honor, and the apartments along John Muir Drive (southern end of Lake Merced).

It serves more than any community service route can ever do. This line stops at major stops like:

• Stonestown, SF State, Lowell High, Janet Pomeroy center [for the disabled], SF Zoo, Ocean Beach, Beach Chalet, Safeway "at the Beach," Balboa business district, and Legion of Honor.

The crosstown bus line also has transfer connections to all these lines:

• 1, 1AX, 5, 16X, 17, 23, 28, 28L, 29, 31, 31AX, 38, 38L, 38AX, 71, 71L, L, M, and N.
  
• SF State Shuttle

Problem 2: Post December 5, 2009 reroute not helpful.
The 18 used to run along Geary and Point Lobos, and passed by the Cliff House. But after December 5th, Muni decided to run the 18 along Balboa and Cabrillo and remove the 38-Geary Ocean Beach. I've argued that it is a bad decision to eliminate the 38-Geary Ocean Beach branch and Muni should have eliminated the Fort Miley branch since the 38L (weekdays and Saturdays) and 38 (weekday evenings and Sundays) drops passengers just ONE BLOCK away from the hospital. If Muni just eliminated the Fort Miley route, there would be no reroutes for the 18 or the elimination of the 38-Geary Ocean Beach branch.

The 18 currently runs at 20 minute frequencies which is less than what the 38-Geary Ocean Beach branch ever operated, and when changing the 18's frequency to 30 minutes, the passengers will suffer greatly. Many have to ride the 18 so they can connect with the 5-Fulton, 38L-Geary Limited (faster ride to downtown vs. the 31-Balboa), and access to Chinatown via the 1-California.

--------------------

Can someone tell me why Muni is targeting the 18-46th Avenue? I thought the re-routes were bad enough, but 30-minute frequencies just makes it worse.

When a Muni representative presented to the SFMTA Board the service cuts, the lady specifically targeted the 18-46th Avenue. I thought to myself, why target the 18? Why get on the microphone and do a P.R. stunt for shock value by saying the line will be getting cut to 30-minute frequencies (10 minute increase) while not comparing all the other routes that will only get a 3 to 5 minute increase to no more than 20 minute frequencies?

The 18-46th Avenue will receive a 33% cut in service. How can they claim a "10%" reduction?

Just today, I was reading NextBus and it showed the 18-46th Avenue was to arrive in 14 minutes and 44 minutes. There's supposed to be another one in 29 minutes (15 minute frequencies during rush hour). Reliable? Not anymore.

If this agency has a grudge against me, don't take it against the public who ride this line.

Do you like someone who can find huge mistake, expose it on the internet, get it re-tweeted to thousands of people in a matter of minutes, and change public policy? I've done it multiple times: Not posting new route schedules and failing to update trip planning programs just a week before changes, barely informing the public about a pass hike, ineffective fare inspectors, and Muni promised to accept "Muni to BART" transfers for the ride back from AT&T Park and I exposed them on video of them failing on their promise.

You will not let the 18-46th Avenue die. I won't let you do that without a fight.

À la carte Muni Passes when Moved to TransLink (Clipper)?

Now that Muni is confirming a tiered system of passes (for all ages) where the cheap passes disallows passengers to ride peak express buses and cable cars, while the premium pass gives those privileges (plus BART for adults), maybe it's time for the SFMTA to restructure their pass system.

Since Muni will be converting paper passes to TransLink/Clipper on the following dates:

• August 1, 2010 (tentative) for "A" [premium] fast pass.
• February 1, 2011 for all disabled, senior, and youth passes.
• No known date for the "M" adult pass.

I believe it may be worthwhile for Muni to take advantage of an à la carte program where passengers can choose based on their needs. Instead of Muni making eight types of passes, TransLink/Clipper makes it easy for someone to choose what they need with a push of a button or a click of a mouse.


Here's how I would run the program:

1. Anyone who wants to buy a pass must buy the "core" portion. This allows unlimited access to all basic Muni lines (regular, limited, and metro).
2. Add express bus service for $5 (adults) and $2.50 for discount.
3. Add Cable Car service for an additional $5 and $2.50 for discount.
   
4. Add BART service for an additional $5. (That is, if BART & Muni can deal out something since the current agreement only covers adults)
   

This gives some flexibility on what the passenger needs. Why pay the $10 premium fee when you don't use certain services? Just pay a little more and get the privilege to ride what you need. I still support a need for a fare credit when a pass without a particular feature can just pay a small additional fee to cover that premium portion the passenger needs (e.g., 25 cent additional cost for the express if you don't have that feature on your pass).

If Caltrain passengers can decide on which zones their pass can cover, pay extra if they want a Muni sticker, and pay a small fee each time they want to go beyond their zone, why can't Muni play along? VTA also does this by giving a $2 credit for pass holders who don't have express bus privileges, and the passengers just pay an extra $2 per ride.

--------------------

Why am I writing about this?
I don't think the SFMTA will go back to the simple style where one pass covers everything. But it could be possible that we may return to the time of the [Mayor] Frank Jordan era where the tiered pass system failed so badly that they turned back in less than a year.

BREAKING: Muni Proposes $5 Monthly Fee for Premium Services for Youth, Disabled, & Seniors

Director Beach of the SFMTA Board asked the agency's representative if the discount passes for seniors, youth, and disabled will be allowed to ride the express buses and cable cars. The representative has verified there will be an expanded variety of passes for this category (if the board approves):

• Youth, senior, and disabled "basic" pass only valid on local, limited, and metro.
• Youth, senior, and disabled "premium" pass also valid on Cable Cars and express buses.
  

The SFMTA Board has mentioned that the SF Board of Supervisors has already approved a pass hike for these three groups to be $20 a month starting May 1st, 2010.

But... a SFMTA employee on the microphone during the hearing stated there will be an additional $5 fee for access to Cable Cars and "peak hour" express lines. That gets my stomach churning. Ouch. An extra $60 a year for the right to ride express and cable cars.

Great, our vendors will have to now sell more types of passes. An "A" pass, "M" pass, three basic discount passes, and three premium discount passes. We'll be hearing the excuse more often: "I'm sorry, we don't have any more cheap passes."

In other news:

• The SFMTA Board repealed the increases to the discounted passes for $30 month.
• SFMTA representative verified all passengers who have the "M" pass who wants to ride an express will pay FULL $2 FARE.
  

Muni Rejecting "Muni Only" Pass for Express Buses: Unfair to 8X Riders

UPDATE: SFMTA Board states the 8X, 8AX, and 8BX are not considered part of the "premium pass" option. So basically, it's the so-called "peak hour" express lines such as the 38AX, 38BX, 31AX, 31BX, etc.

It doesn't make a lot of sense to me of why the SFMTA Board of Directors wants to vote on denying passengers the right to use their "M" pass on express lines and only allowing the premium "A" pass be the only sole pass allowed for adults.

From a recent article from SF Appeal, Eve Batey asked some more in depth questions about the proposal, and the answers she received showed just how messed-up Muni is. Instead of allowing passengers to use their "M" pass and pay an additional surcharge (e.g., 25 cents), Muni's interpretation is that "M" pass holders will pay the full $2 price.

I don't support any surcharge or restrictions to a "Muni Only" pass, but if there needs to be some fair middle ground, do a surcharge like they do for VTA. VTA gives passengers a fare credit if they have a non-express monthly pass or a non-express day pass, and they pay only an extra $2 for the privilege (instead of paying the full fare of $4).

In Muni's case, any cash paying customer won't be affected, but a "M" pass user is cheated out of an extra $2, or will have to suffer with paying for an "A" pass that will add $120 a year.

But even worse is the 8X-Bayshore Express line. That line is more than an express, it makes a lot of local stops along its route.

• It is heavily utilized by the folks in Chinatown getting to Market street, but if Muni rejects the "M" pass, you can expect more passengers to load-up on the 30 and 45 lines, or try to cheat their way onto the bus through the back doors.
• The route also enters the lower income portions of the city including some of the city's housing projects and Vis Valley. Can the adults afford to pay the extra $10/month or $120/year additional charge so they can get to their jobs in downtown, get their education at City College's Ocean campus, or do their grocery shopping in Chinatown?

--------------------

One item to note:

It's a little odd that the SFMTA wants to actually screw up the adult pass system Take a look...

The SFMTA is going to be voting on this topic this Friday, but the PDF document provided (page 50) shows that they may consider having Muni selling more types of passes:

1. "Express Route Premium Monthly Pass (excluding the 8AX and 8BX express routes)" which will give passengers to ride the regular, limited, metro, and expresses (except Candlestick).
2. "Cable Cars Premium Monthly Pass" will allow passengers to ride regular, limited, metro, and Cable Cars.

Why would Muni even sell more passes to complicate the system? Why FOUR PASSES? Can't they just simplify with the current two pass structure? A basic pass and a premium pass?

The Muni Nightmare Starts Tomorrow - The SFMTA Board Votes

My favorite personal quote about Muni: "We are not digging a tunnel [Central Subway], just a grave for Muni."

And the grave is going to get much deeper and filled with cement if the SFMTA Board does the wrong thing at tomorrow's hearing.

The SFMTA Board will be voting on two major items that will make a major impact on our city.

Item 11 is to consider any changes to the 2010 fiscal year budget for Muni and our worse fears could come to light including:

1. More reductions in service (e.g., 30 minute frequencies on the 18-46th Avenue).
2. Paying $4 a ride on Muni.

Item 12 covers the pass issues:

1. Increasing the price of youth, senior, and disabled passes.
2. Establishing a "Express Route Premium Monthly Pass" and "Cable Car Premium Monthly Pass."

This has gone way too far.  Nobody will ride a bus line that comes every 30 minutes when school children, elderly, and university students depend to get to where they are going.  Are they nuts to raise the pass price for the young, old, and disabled?

How about us adults?  Do they really expect to now force vendors to sell four passes?  You'll be hearing this more often at your vendor: "Sorry, we ran out of the $60 "M" pass, would you like a premium cable car pass for $100?"  It also doesn't make a lot of sense to penalize citizens who ride an express route just on the local portion, for example, I would sometimes take the 38AX in the evening at 33rd & Geary for a short hop to get home (that's because those idiots at Muni eliminated the 18-46th Avenue's route along Geary Blvd. and Point Lobos Avenue.

I'm starting to lose my patience over this agency.  Does anyone remember the controversial redevelopment project in this city?  It got to such a boiling point that at a hearing, an audience member so upset at the destruction of his community ran up to Justin Herman and grabbed him by the throat.

The SFMTA board better do the right thing for the people, or us citizens will start demanding the resignations of ALL SFMTA BOARD MEMBERS AND NATHANIEL FORD.

Paying $4 (double) for Muni? Less service on M-Ocean View (Muni hates SF State)?

Muni is broke... I everyone in this city knew this fact for the last several years with more fare and pass hikes, and cutbacks in service.

Muni had a nice town hall meeting where the REAL OWNERS OF MUNI vented their anger at the agency. One item on the table is to double the fare (or what KGO says "100%").

There's two important messages Muni is trying to tell us: bend over and get ready for a probe up your ass (the fear tactic to allow the agency to make cutbacks sound better than hikes), or start dishing out more money (yeah, for even crappier service).

If Muni doubled the fares, here's how much you'll get f***ed:

• Adults: $4 a ride and an unknown price for a pass.
  
• Youth, Seniors, and Disabled: $1.50 a ride and $30 for a pass
• Candlestick express and Bay to Breakers express: $20 round-trip
• Cable Car: $10 for a one-way ride

I honestly think it's just a fear tactic. If Muni really followed through with their threat, the agency would see much less ridership than ever before, and that means the possibility of less income for the agency if more than 50% quit riding Muni and/or just commit to fare evasion with their lazy and few fare inspectors.

Fare evasion sounds even more tempting every single time Muni gives a false threat of hikes.

--------------------

Did you hear about one of their other dumb ideas? They want to cut back service for the M-Ocean View line. Muni's management is either high or was smoking weed to think of this idea.

I learned the M line is the most heavily used light rail line in the entire city. You may have thought the N-Judah is king... nope! The main reason why the M-Ocean View is so heavily used is because of my Alma mater, SF State. BART is too expensive since it crosses the Daly City border and charges $2.95 for a ride from any stop within SF, so everyone takes the M-Ocean View because it's 95 cents cheaper each way or free for those who can run away from a fare inspector.

I don't understand this idea. The M-Ocean View is mainly utilized by SF State students and you want to reduce service?

Give Muni a piece of your mind, like FIRE NAT FORD: http://tinyurl.com/SCREWmuni