Some of Muni's diesel bus lines do better than 4,000 miles between breakdowns, an all-time high for the agency. But it's still lower than AC Transit (4,665), Seattle King County Metro (5,805), or SEPTA (9,842). Muni's 40-foot electric buses can't even hit 2,000 miles. Sixty-foot electric buses, the 7000-series, only go a piddling 833 miles between breakdowns. Muni's internal goal is just 1,000 miles, meaning buses could die virtually every week and still perform satisfactorily. "Even our goals have been reduced over the years to reflect the condition of our fleet," Haley admits.
The first step in solving a problem is admitting a problem exists. In the months since Ed Reiskin took over Muni, the agency's financial disclosures — both internally and those made to state and federal government agencies — have grown far clearer and up front about Muni's daunting maintenance backlog. That such a basic development is perceived as a breath of fresh air is an indictment both of Muni's prior leadership under Nat Ford and the succession of mayors who mined the system for political capital and balanced the city's budget by allowing other departments to cannibalize Muni even more voraciously than it cannibalized itself. Via "work orders," the police, ambulance services, and others bill Muni for their transit-related duties; these payouts exploded from $36 million in 2006 to $65 million in the current budget. Muni has, for years, been the city's slush fund. Millions of Muni dollars go toward fixing other city agencies' budget holes — and not its own resources.
Joe Eskenazi (top), Christopher MacKechnie / publictransport.about.com (bottom).
The plastic has been atop Coach No. 5427 since early 2011; below, a properly maintained bus.
Courtesy of Dorian Maxwell
Internal Muni documents reveal that when drivers complain about bumpy rides from lumpy or bald tires like this, the tires are placed on the rear axles, where drivers cannot feel them.
Related Content
More About
For years, Muni skimped on maintenance to keep the agency running and create the veneer of a healthier system. The "Investment in Maintenance," however, is not all talk: New mechanics are slated to be hired this year. Funds earmarked for construction projects have been diverted into improving vehicles. Both LRVs and hundreds of diesel buses will undergo midlife overhauls. In the coming months, Muni will consider putting out a bid on 50 new electric buses, and is examining the fiscal feasibility of leasing vehicles in an attempt to lower the age of its geriatric fleet. Federal and state stimulus grants, meanwhile, will pay for the rehabilitation of the 11 light-rail vehicles Muni mechanics cannibalized into wreck status.
Creating Muni's maintenance backlog required years of mismanagement. Even beginning to address it will require years of nurturing and a dedicated stream of cash. While Muni's current top management does acknowledge maintenance needs, top management at Muni has, historically, not stuck around for very long. And the "Investment in Maintenance" has caveats. This year's planned maintenance budget was whittled from an initial proposal of $44.5 million to the current tally of $10.9 million. Even this assumes millions in labor concessions and a windfall from traffic and parking citations and fees.
When asked what would happen if the agency returned to its status quo of saving money in the short term by slashing maintenance costs, Haley's reply was straightforward. "We've got a very intelligent group of riders. They know the system. It'd be a huge mistake to attempt to bullshit them. So, I think the results would be pretty obvious." Riders sticking with the system will be burdened with a slower and more unreliable commute. Those who can leave, will — further clogging the city's arteries.
It's a scenario that can't be staved off with all the garbage bags in the world. Muni would continue to be the transit service it is, instead of the one it could be.
E-mail Joe.Eskenazi@SFWeekly.com.
