In less than a month, San Francisco voters will get their second chance in a year to punch a ticket for the city’s beleaguered transit agency.
Like public transportation across the country, Muni was knocked off track by the pandemic. Federal intervention staved off the dreaded “death spiral” of fewer riders and fewer funds, but the agency remains in trouble. Muni officials hoped a $400 million bond on June’s ballot would be a boon; a majority of SF voters approved it, but it didn’t hit the two-thirds threshold and went down to defeat.
Some, but not all, of that funding gap could be filled by Proposition L. The measure would renew a half-cent sales tax, first approved more than 30 years ago, and extend it to 2053. The city controller said it should generate approximately $100 million a year at first and help pay for service and maintenance, as well as safety measures for pedestrians and bicyclists and other street improvements. (The SF Municipal Transportation Agency also governs streets and traffic.)
The revenue will provide crucial matching funds for federal and state grants, according to Eric Young, SF County Transportation Authority director of communications. The Bay Area is set to receive $4.5 billion over the next five years from the 2021 federal infrastructure bill, and San Francisco wants to compete for those dollars.
Passing Prop L next month would give SF 20 extra years of financial stability and help it compete, Young said. Opponents say the appeal for federal grants is “false marketing.”
The current tax plan, which was put in place in 2003, only lasts until 2034. It helped pay for big projects such as the transformation of Doyle Drive into the Presidio Parkway.
Backers also want to extend the tax because it’s the sole source of funding for street improvements and paratransit service — seniors are one of SF’s fastest growing population segments; 21 percent of the city is age 60 and older.
There were 27 street fatalities in 2021, just four fewer than 2014, and the city is on a similar grim pace this year.
San Francisco has ambitious street safety and climate goals that cannot be met without prioritizing transit, bicycles, and other modes that get drivers to leave cars behind. (The bond money would also apply to BART, Caltrain, and ferry service within city limits.)
For now, however, the Vision Zero goal — zero traffic-related deaths by 2024 — seems just as unreachable as when the pledge was made in 2014. There were 27 street fatalities in 2021, just four fewer than 2014, and the city is on a similar grim pace this year.
Prop L backers say without the funds specific programs such as the Quick Build program would run out of money in the next few years.
“If Prop L doesn’t pass, we won’t have money for safe streets,” says Jodie Medeiros, executive director of Walk SF. Local transit planners have also noted in a new blueprint that SF will need increased paratransit services. (The new plan was the topic of an online town hall last week.)
Any call for new government spending requires scrutiny, but SFMTA has supplied extra fuel for skepticism in recent years, with several major projects running over time and over budget, such as the Central Subway and rapid bus transit on Geary and Van Ness. (Editor’s note: Don’t get us started on the Geary buses.)
Sup. Rafael Mandelman introduced the legislation that became Prop L, but he’s also been a critic of the transit agency. At a 2021 hearing on SFMTA’s track record, its insularity and other flaws came under fire. After the hearing Mandelman told The Frisc, “Is there some way that we can use knowledge and competence and skills from one department in another? Those are the kinds of questions I would like to figure out.”
Tax dollars at work
When San Francisco voters first extended the transportation sales tax in 2003, it laid the groundwork for a potential transformation of the city’s streetscape, one as significant as the 20th-century shift that let cars dominate our streets.
In the past 20 years, $420 million has gone to big projects such as the Salesforce Transit Center, Caltrain electrification within city limits, the Central Subway, and bus rapid transit.
The tax has also been a key fund for neighborhood street changes, raising some $456 million to improve pedestrian and bike safety with protected bike lanes, crosswalk bulb-outs, and more. (A project map is here.)
When asked if the lack of progress toward Vision Zero means SF isn’t spending its money wisely, Medeiros responded that neighborhoods that have received more attention, like the Tenderloin, are seeing a reduction in traffic deaths.
The biggest chunk of Prop L funds, 41 percent, would cover maintenance and replacement of trains, buses, and facilities. Regular upkeep suffered when fares and parking fees, typically half the budget, plummeted during the pandemic.
At the same time, SFMTA is under pressure to return to full service even as ridership remains down. As of July, the agency was running at 86 percent of pre-COVID service levels, but only 55 percent of ridership. This gets to the heart of the funding problem. Muni relies on “fare box” funding, but with SF’s high levels of remote work, the weekday commuters likely to pay full fares are largely absent. And it’s uncertain whether they’ll return.
As with any tax or bond measure, Prop L will require two-thirds approval. Opponents include tech executive Larry Marso, who wrote the argument against the measure, and David Pilpel, a constant commenter at public meetings who’s best known for using environmental review to delay transit projects. According to campaign finance records, there has been no official fundraising in opposition to L.
Supporters of Prop L have raised nearly $943,000, with real estate investment trust ProLogis, the California Alliance for Jobs, and Operating Engineers Local 3 among its biggest donors.
By any measure, Prop L’s dollars are a tiny sliver of what SF’s streets and transit need in coming years — at least $78 billion through 2050, according to the county transit blueprint. Post-COVID uncertainty only ratchets up the debate over where the money will come from. Some advocates, including Sup. Dean Preston, want public transit to be completely free. That would avoid the ups and down of relying on the fare box, but removing a huge portion of the budget would also force a reckoning on how to replace it.
While the chronic condition of our streets and transit remains in question, voters for now need to decide whether to apply a large Band-Aid.