On Saturday, the SF Municipal Railway will start making changes to its network. Most of the routes with fewer people on it are going to be canceled, while the busier buses are going to be traveling more frequently. The service changes are driven by a $129 million budget deficit for the fiscal year that started in July. Representatives say that the route changes will actually NOT save any money, but the way they are designed will decrease the hours a driver is needed, thus saving them about $3.2 million a year. In order to lesson the confusion about the already complicated network, "ambassadors" have been placed on the buses to hand out brochures and advise people where to go and when to go. I think this is helpful because the system confuses some people, and the changes don't help. Having someone around to offer advice and hand out schedules/brochures is a smart thing to do.
People that frequently use the muni are having mixed feelings about the changes. One woman stated that the route she normally takes is extremely "useful" and better than the others because it is "less crowded". Others feel the same way, but one man stated that he "understood why they're eliminating it" because not enough people are using a certain route. Although they will not be pampered with the luxury of a half empty bus anymore, it has to be done because of the new routes.
Schadenfreude Smörgåsbord (Open Thread)
1 hour ago
5 comments:
Wouldn't this cause problems for hundreds of people? I understand the more busy times of the day should have more buses, but the "half empty" (half full? haha) still have a decent amount of people. And wouldn't people simply switching routes because their useful one got canceled make other routes more crowed? I personally think this wasn't a very well though out plan. There could of been other ways of saving money or even trying to make more to cover the difference. A little bit of a price increase (25 cents for example would not have much of an impact of regular muni users and would even help them out by keeping the half full buses.
For the busier routes (I'm assuming the more crowded ones?) they are getting more buses and they are coming more often, so they won't be more crowded like most people would expect. But I don't know how well this is going to work.. Some people are going to have to walk further to another station or reschedule themselves.
I feel like while the schedule changes might be effective and definitely save money, having people to hand out brochures and such seems like a waste of a paycheck aka tax dollars. There's always an information booth and pamphlets can be distributed by a plastic tray! This might be too much of an attempt to look good in front of the Cisco community (I feel like nobody calls it that... San Francisco). But kudos for a solid effort local government!
I was watching this on the news this morning and the SF Muni also recently installed new "DriveCams" on all of its trolley, biodiesel and biodiesel-electric hybrid buses in an effort to improve safety and to monitor drivers. The system uses exterior and interior cameras to record collisions and other unsafe driving behavior. They also said that these cameras would help to "assess liability and reduce expenses" from incidents that include vehicle damage, personal injury, and worker's compensation. The whole "DriveCam" system cost about $1.2 million.. so I hope that this $1.2 million is not a waste and actual improvements will be made!
It's interesting that although this situation may cause unemployment, it maintains the same amount of efficiency. However, this can affect people who do use the less-traveled routes. I am not sure this is the best thing to do, if it negatively affects so many citizens.
-Molly Cheng
Post a Comment