San Francisco is asking voters to pay more for Muni. The question is whether the agency has earned another bailout. Weeks after Measure A approval, a $535 million Earthquake Safety and Emergency Response Bond that includes $200 million to replace the seismically unsafe Potrero Bus Yard, the city is lining up two new operating tax measures for the November ballot. Before asking taxpayers to contribute more, San Francisco should show it can use the money it already has wisely.
Two measures now before voters would raise roughly $315 million annually and extend through the early 2040s. Mayor Lurie’s Stronger Muni for All parcel tax has won support from most supervisors, while the Connect Bay Area sales tax authorized by Senate Bill 63 would add a full percentage point in San Francisco. Residents are being asked to pay more now and keep paying for decades, even though Muni’s core problem is not a shortage of revenue.
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency’s $307 million deficit is a problem of structure, cost, and performance. Better policy and management could close the gap without forcing taxpayers to absorb another long-term burden. This is not just a funding crisis. It is an efficiency crisis.
The sales tax is especially regressive, pushing San Francisco’s combined rate from 8.625 percent to 9.625 percent, falling hardest on lower-income households. A caregiver in the Excelsior replacing a refrigerator or fixing a car would pay the same tax as a Pacific Heights venture capitalist, but out of a far smaller budget. The burden is even harder to ignore when governments are asking working people to shoulder higher living costs.
The parcel tax is no less problematic. Based on square footage rather than property value, a modest bungalow in Visitacion Valley can be taxed much like a far more valuable home in Sea Cliff. Most single-family homes would owe about $129 annually, apartment buildings at least $249, and commercial parcels at least $799. Landlords can pass through up to $65 per unit to rent-controlled tenants, so renters do not escape the bill either, paying indirectly through higher rent. Taxes would continue through June 2042.
What makes this especially frustrating is that Muni’s operating problems are measurable and, in many cases, fixable. According to ConnectedSF’s analysis, the agency’s inflation-adjusted operating cost per vehicle revenue hour has risen 26 percent since 2019, adding $171 million in annual expense even as passenger trips fell 25 percent. Operator headcount is up 30 percent since 2010, yet operators are driving 27 percent fewer hours on average. Total agency headcount has grown by more than 900 positions since 2017, without corresponding improvement in customer satisfaction.
Fare collection is another failure. Fare revenue has fallen from 24 percent of the budget in 2010 to just 8 percent today, while fare evasion has doubled to 20 percent with the number of fare inspectors dropping from 93 to 45. Restoring even some of the earlier farebox recovery could be worth $220 million or more. These reforms could go toward the current deficit.
Timing matters. San Francisco just approved capital investment through Measure A, including $200 million for the Potrero Bus Yard, because voters understand that infrastructure resilience matters. Capital spending alone will not solve a broken operating model. Meanwhile, city leaders continue to pursue expensive rail fantasies and future transit expansions, even as office vacancy remains high and downtown work patterns have changed dramatically. That raises a fair question: why should taxpayers fund today’s inefficiencies while the city keeps pursuing tomorrow’s megaprojects?
There is also a broader issue of modernization. These taxes would lock San Francisco into a labor-intensive transit model well into the 2040s as automation begins to reshape transportation. Autonomous buses are already being tested in Singapore, Japan is moving toward thousands of Level 4 autonomous vehicles, and Waymo is already serving paying passengers on San Francisco streets. Yet SFMTA’s funding plan offers little sign of how it intends to adapt. It makes no sense to demand decades of new taxes for a system that may soon operate very differently.
No one is arguing that San Francisco should abandon transit. The city should support transit — but only after it demonstrates discipline, accountability, and a serious plan for modernization. Voters should not be asked to write another blank check to preserve a system that still has not fixed its own problems.
This November, San Francisco should send a clear message: reform first, then revenue. Fix Muni — then talk about new taxes.
Gina Tse-Louie is a San Francisco real estate broker and philanthropist.
The Voice welcomes submissions of unsolicited op-eds and letters to the editor. Acceptance and publication is solely the prerogative of The Voice; no payment is offered for op-eds and letters to the editor. Any opinions expressed in op-eds and letters to the editor are those solely of the writer(s) and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of The Voice of San Francisco, its staff, contributors, sponsors, or donors. Send op-eds and letters to: Editor@thevoicesf.org.
