Golden Gate
Bridge District Works to Stem Red Ink
The District’s financial plan
calls for $145 million in expense reductions and $57 million in new
and additional revenue generation over the next five years in order
to achieve financial stability. The following actions have
been taken to implement the financial plan:
* Phase 1 service reductions
saving nearly $2 million annually were implemented in March 2003.
·Reductions in work force, saving over $2 million, were made in
April 2003, with a second round to follow this fall.
* In May 2003, the Board approved
a 30 to 40 percent fare increase for commute ticket ferry riders and
a 70 percent increase for weekday Larkspur ferry cash riders; bus
fares were increased 5 percent effective July 1. Revenue
generation was projected at over $1 million annually. Staff
was directed to develop a comprehensive five-year fare program for
July 1, 2004.
* In July 2003, the Board approved
a Phase 2 bus service reduction plan that is projected to reduce
expenses by about $17 million per year starting in November 2003.
Following approval of the new
route structure, the Finance-Auditing Committee directed staff to
consider an increase in fares for "premium" commute bus
routes for concurrent implementation in November 2003. This
direction was provided in response to several comments at the
service meetings regarding a willingness to pay more for direct
service to San Francisco. Given the short timeframe, staff
proposed elimination of the 20 percent discount provided to bus
riders with purchase of books of 20 "Ride Value" tickets
for riders on 16 direct commute bus routes. Ride Value tickets
would be replaced by new "convenience" commuter ticket
books priced at the full cash fare. This proposal was
estimated to generate approximately $0.5 million annually. A
public hearing was set for August 22, 2003, and notice was issued.
Staff received over 2,300 comments
in 426 emails, 6 letters, 2 phone calls, and 4 petitions from
riders, nearly all urging the District to not approve a fare
increase. Thirteen persons testified against the proposal at
the August 22 public hearing. In many cases, the comments
referenced the fact that while more direct service is in place in
the ultimate service plan approved for implementation in November,
the service level is still less than is currently offered.
Both the Bus Passengers Advisory Committee and the Ferry Passengers
Advisory Committee sent letters advising against the fare increase
proposal. Those who were supportive of the general concept of
a premium fare increase suggested that more time be allowed for
development of an alternate approach to eliminating discount ticket
fares, so commuters would retain an incentive for using buses and
tickets.
Concurrent with the public comment
period, staff reviewed the technical details involved with
implementing a premium fare on commuter bus routes. Several
concerns and hurdles with the original staff proposal were
identified:
Proliferation of Tickets. There
are currently 12 different ticket books for Ride Value bus, ferry
commuter, and Marin local bus pre-paid fare programs. The
proposed premium commuter bus fare ticket would require 6 more
ticket books be printed, distributed, sold, and counted.
Various staff working with transit ticket programs and outside
ticket vendors have expressed significant concern that a greater
number of ticket books would create unmanageable operational and
administrative burdens. Safeway, the largest ticket book
distributor, informed District staff that it will not add any more
tickets to its local store inventory. This would present a
serious problem for customers who use Safeway as their primary
source of ticket books.
Complex fare collection
procedures. The proposed premium
ticket was intended for use only on direct commuter bus
routes. Some customers, however, use shuttle routes to access
the direct commuter routes. Ride Value tickets offering a 20
percent discount would still be valid for use on the shuttle
routes. Shuttling to a commuter bus route could be handled by
allowing a free transfer from the shuttle to the commuter bus so the
customer would not have to pay a premium fare. But on the
return trip, the premium fare would be charged first on the direct
bus, and a credit would be due on the second, connecting shuttle
bus. Bus operators do not handle cash directly and a refund process
would require extensive documentation and staff time to implement.
Difficulty with inclusion in
Translink. Initially, staff felt
that long-term concerns about ticket proliferation and the complex
fare collection system would be temporary due to the introduction of
Translink throughout the bus system as scheduled for summer
2004. Translink is designed to replace ticket books and to
accommodate premium fares on specified routes. During the
current limited roll-out of TransLink, the new premium fare could
not be included due to both timeline concerns and the expense of
system programming necessary to allow this to be included with our
current fare structure. Staff is working with TransLink to
develop the necessary flexibility for long-term implementation of
such a concept but short-term it is not available.