A
Subject: Rose Tsai MUNI position paper
Sent: 10/5/98 11:06
Received: 10/5/98 21:25
From: Sfinfrisco@aol.com
To: Andrew Sullivan, Andrew@Sulli.org
MUNI
Recent polls show that nearly three out of four San Francisco voters are
dissatisfied with Muni's performance. This has been a longtime problem
for
our city. I believe that merely increasing Muni's budget without an
intelligent plan designed to solve its problems is useless. A major
overhaul
of the Muni system is necessary.
Muni must be held accountable to the citizens of San Francisco. In June
the
Board of Supervisors approved Muni's $331 million budget and insisted on
quarterly performance reports. While I agree that this is a step in the
right
direction, I think we have to do considerably more to make Muni
accountable to
the people of our city. It is crucial that we compel Muni to establish
new
performance standards. These would include having buses running on
schedule,
keeping buses clean and working properly, and having courteous drivers.
Presently, Muni's management system has no incentive to do any of these
things. Muni managers are civil service employees, and are promoted
solely on
the basis of seniority. Therefore, they are not rewarded for doing a good
job, or demoted or fired for doing poorly. Unlike employees in the
private
sector, they have no incentive to make sure the system works. Drivers and
mechanics are also not held accountable for their service. Employee
moral
is bad. It is clear that this organization does not work.
I propose that when the next union contract (MOU) is being negotiated
with the
city, we include performance accountability as part of the contract for
all
Muni employees. The new performance standards are essential. Salaries for
Muni employees should be tied to merit and employees would be rewarded or
demoted appropriately.
After the new contract has been negotiated we should give Muni a certain
amount of time, perhaps a year, to bring their service up to the new
standards. Then we can reassess the situation. If there has been a
marked
improvement, I would be willing to look at proposals for raising more
money
for Muni. One proposal is to create an assessment district that would
dedicate funds for Muni. Another recommendation is to raise fares, which
are
currently among the lowest in the nation. However, I do not believe in
giving
Muni any more money until we see signs of significant progress on their
part.
If service does not improve, I would explore other solutions, such as
reorganizing the way Muni is presently run. At this time, several
separate
entities determine Muni policy, work rules, fares and salaries. The city
could create one agency that would be solely responsible for overseeing
Muni.
There is also the possibility of a class action suit in which riders
could sue
Muni for not operating up to the standards set in the new contract. As a
last
resort, I am willing to examine what the private sector could do to manage
Muni. Although I do not think it will be necessary to go this far, I am
ready
to investigate anything that would stop Muni's deterioration. I think with
proper management by the city, we can make Muni accountable to the public
and
obtain the kind of public transportation service San Francisco deserves.
Andrew Sullivan
andrew@sulli.org - www.sulli.org
s u l l i . o r g
1668 Grove, SF CA 94117
415 673 0626