Muni Service Cuts Aren’t Really about Budget Deficits, It’s About Shrinking Our Public Transit System
The 21 Hayes has served residents and visitors for over a century. Before the pandemic, the 21 logged over 7,000 rides a day. After the line was suspended during the pandemic, it was brought back at a fraction of the frequency and with a shortened route. Because of that, ridership is now down to about 1,300 a day. Rather than rebuild the line and its ridership, MTA is slashing service again, eliminating half the 21 Hayes route. Ridership will drop further, and then MTA will use the low ridership to justify fully eliminating the line. This is how public transit dies.
After being elected, my first conversation with a department head was with MTA Director Jeff Tumlin. We had a nice chat about our vision for sustainable transportation in San Francisco, but one part of the conversation surprised me. Former Director Tumlin told me he thought the 21 and 31 lines were redundant of other lines and suggested maybe replacing them with on demand shuttles.
Three months later, COVID shut down the city. Many bus lines were suspended. A year later, some were still suspended, including the 21 Hayes and 31 Balboa. With no announced timeline for their return, it became increasingly apparent that MTA was trying to eliminate these “parallel” lines. Tumlin tapped his consultant colleague Jarrett Walker to come up with a plan. Walker is known for consulting with cities on how to downsize their systems, sacrificing geographical coverage for core network lines.
In retrospect, none of this should have come as a surprise. Back in 2008, MTA’s Transit Effectiveness Project recommended elimination of “parallel” lines, and exploring on demand shuttles. The TEP recommendation to eliminate the 26 Valencia was met with such community opposition that MTA abandoned that plan. Rather than learning from this that people have good reasons to want to keep their bus lines, SFMTA leadership drew a different lesson: that it would be easier to eliminate lines quietly than have real community input.
The pandemic presented an opportunity to achieve this downsized version of Muni. The Mayor and MTA leadership did not anticipate that even in the midst of the pandemic, a united front of community leaders, transit riders, advocates, and Muni operators would stand up to these cuts. Our office was proud to play a leading role. We forced the MTA to change course after we passed a resolution at the Board of Supervisors, rallied against cuts, and exposed their plans at two public hearings. They restored the lines in 2022, though at dramatically reduced frequency and shortened routes.
We understood that the initial relaunch of these lines would not be at full service, but we impressed upon SFMTA that they should invest in increased frequency and restore the full routes. Instead, they kept anemic service (every 20 min), shortened routes (ending at market), and no nighttime service (10pm last bus). As we feared, the reduced ridership from these changes is now being used as a justification for further cuts.
The cuts couldn’t come at a worse time. Muni is struggling to regain ridership lost in the pandemic. Workers are increasingly being required to return to the office and city leaders continue to push for a downtown economic recovery. Muni service is essential for these goals.
SFMTA claims the cuts are compelled by the budget. On its website, SFMTA writes, “We’re facing a $50 million budget shortfall … so, in summer 2025, we’ll have to cut Muni service by about 2%, which will save about $7 million.”
Contrary to MTA’s claims, the latest attempt to eliminate Muni lines has little to do with the budget. This is the culmination of twenty years of MTA trying to force service cuts and route abandonments that the public does not want. The new cuts will disproportionately harm seniors, persons with disabilities, and people of color in the Fillmore/Western Addition and Tenderloin neighborhoods. For all the MTA’s talk about equity, it is hard to think of a less equitable round of service cuts.
In the context of MTA’s budget, or the City budget, the savings here are minimal. SFMTA’s annual operating budget is $1.4 billion. The agency sits on untapped reserves of $140 million that could easily be used to prevent service cuts. Cutting service to save a mere $7 million makes no sense whatsoever, particularly at a time when the SFMTA and city leaders know that closing the projected future deficit will only happen with state intervention or a funding ballot measure.
To their credit, SFMTA directors Henderson, Heminger, and Vice Chair Cajina advocated for dipping into the reserves rather than make these new cuts. "If we never touch the reserves, even to the extent of 5% of the total amount, which is what $7 million equates to, what's the purpose of having a reserve?" Heminger said. "It's called, commonly, a rainy-day fund, and it's been raining a lot." Heminger is correct, but in a split 4-3 vote, the SFMTA Board of Directors approved the cuts rather than touch the reserves.
SFMTA could use its reserve, make an ask of the Mayor and Board of Supervisors for some or all of the funds, or Mayor Lurie could tap any number of billionaire donors he’s convened to fund civic priorities.
Sadly, funding Muni does not appear to be a priority. City leaders—most of whom never ride Muni despite a voter-approved law that requires them to do so twice a week—seem to be fine with downsizing Muni rather than investing in public transportation.
There is still time to restore service, save Muni lines, and invest in public transportation. San Franciscans should speak up before it’s too late.
