Howard Wong, AIA, Committee Chair
TRANSIT ACCOUNTABILITY: BEYOND MONEY
Billions & Billions of Money: Not All that Glitters is Gold
Muni’s structural budget deficits will persist for years or decades to come, with increasing labor, operating, infrastructure, and deferred maintenance costs. Over the last decade, despite expenditures of billions of dollars, San Francisco’s transit modal share of all trips has declined, even before the pandemic, an extremely poor return on the dollar.
The $2 billion Central Subway has been a major contributor to perpetual budget deficits, elimination of bus lines, and decreased service. Its local matching funds alone could have transformed the entire Muni system by improving maintenance, next-generation mobility, service, and technology. Its $400 million cost overrun would have covered several years of deficits. Its water leak repairs cost $7 million and counting. And high annual operating costs (for fewer riders) continue to cut citywide service year after year.
Voters want assurances that any new taxes will be spent on intended purposes, to save and restore transit service, not diverting millions or billions of funds to the costly low-ridership Central Subway. The alphabet-soup of transit funders—FTA, CTC, CalSTA, MTC, SFCTA, SFMTA—need to safeguard public funds and dramatically increase transit modal share.
Trail of Transit Boondoggles: Mega Money for Little Gain
It is bewildering as to why politicians would push for a costly divisive subway just ahead of a transit tax on the November ballot. Muni faces structural budget deficits for decades to come. Even Muni is downplaying the politicians’ push: “In the near term, given our financial situation and the limited funding resources currently available to us, prioritizing cost-effective improvements to existing services and projects remains our top priority.”
Push for a low-ridership, high operating cost subway seems to have objectives other than that of transit. Tax measures help ride-share companies supplant transit and undermine confidence in Muni priorities. A subway system that reinforces the northern waterfront upzoning plan escalates land values and promotes lucrative development.
Quicker and cheaper transit solutions exist. Especially after the 1989 Loma Prieta earthquake, the City could have started a free shuttle bus loop from Moscone and Union Square to Chinatown, North Beach, and Fisherman’s Wharf.
Like great metropolitan transit authorities around the world, the Bay Area’s integration of regional transit needs to be accelerated. By coordinating the Bay Area’s 27 transit agencies and 140 transit-related providers, shared cost-savings and a regional network would benefit everyone.
Results-Driven Expenditures: Need Bang for the Buck
Continuing to spend millions or billions of transit dollars without significant increases in transit modal share and ridership numbers is the height of insanity. Let us be pragmatically bolder by jumping to the next generation of public transit.
Revolutionary transit technology is already here: smart bus rapid transit, automated trackless trains (guided by painted sensors on roads), 24/7 micro-buses, large-capacity electric ferry boats, flying taxis, smart e-bikes and scooters (for cargo, delivery, and last-mile connectivity), and digital management of streets, traffic, and transit. Perpetual structural budget deficits, changing economics of work-from-home, decentralized and polycentric districts, and AI and technology require a futuristic mindset. Instead of waiting 15-30 years for costly subways, San Francisco can more quickly increase transit modal share and ridership numbers via efficient conventional and new-age transit projects.
| GOOD PROJECTS CRITERIA: WEEDING OUT THE BAD AND THE POLITICS Does the project significantly increase transit modal share and ridership numbers?Are the benefits worth the cost?Are there cheaper and quicker projects and technology that meet or exceed objectives?Is the project really needed and in the public good or politically-driven? Is there an independent analysis of costs and viable alternatives? If the project fails to meet objectives, are there formal consequences or penalties? |
Vision Zero Case Study: Funding for Global Best Practices
After each traffic or pedestrian death, “Thoughts and prayers” are tiring performative diversions from comprehensive action plans based on global best practices. Hoboken (NJ) has had no traffic deaths for eight consecutive years as a result of crosswalk and street design, reduced speed limits, and low-cost paint on posts for safety upgrades. Helsinki (Finland) has had zero pedestrian, cyclist, or passenger fatalities for a year with a Vision-Zero policy, safe street design, lower road speeds, automated cameras, and pedestrian-oriented urban design.
Sweden has one of the world’s lowest rates of drunk driving, due to strict laws (a 0.02% blood alcohol limit), wide random testing, harsh penalties, ignition interlocks, and high social stigma. China’s new generation of Electric Vehicles has AI safety technology that scans roads with lasers, sees obstacles in the dark, avoids obstacles and pedestrians, automatically brakes for emergencies, and refuses to let you crash.
California is making strides with AB 413 (“Daylighting Law”), which prohibits parking within 20 feet of crosswalks to improve visibility, a key to Hoboken’s success. Further statewide laws and enforcement tools should be considered: lower speed limits, stronger DUI regulations, no right turn on red, bans on retractable car door handles, and more.
Local Equitable Distribution of Money and Jobs
Prioritize transit funding to local businesses, contractors, unions, vendors, and workers via quicker projects distributed to SF districts and neighborhoods, which quickly boosts community businesses, jobs, transit ridership, street beautification, multi-modal design, and safety. With professional analysis of cost-benefits and time, selective smart projects can more quickly transform the citywide Muni system. Eschewing transit politics, Muni can weed out costly inefficient mega-projects that divert massive dollars to international companies, out-of-state contractors and vendors, consultants, lobbyists, and special interests.
| HOWARD’S (OCCAM’S) TRANSIT RAZOR: The simplest solution is preferrable, building projects that get the most transit benefits, for the most people, at the lowest cost, in the shortest timeframe, and with the highest design quality, and which significantly increase transit modal share. FRISC = Fast, Frequent, Reliable, Inexpensive, Safe, Clean, and “Cool” |
