Looking Beyond The BART Strike: Questions For Bay Area People

BART question(s) for Bay Area people:

1). Would you pay more for "express" service? 

2). Would you be more likely to take BART during commuter hours if it was cheaper? Or, would you ride BART during commuter hours regardless, even if they raised fees (within reason)? 

3). Would you utilize BART, possibly at an increased fee, to be able to ride it between midnight and 6am (start with weekends to accommodate for track maintenance on weekdays), as a fully functional 24 hour transit system? -Thus greatly decreasing the possibility of Drunk Driving accidents and deaths, simultaneously stimulating nightlife/business/culture/community for the entire Bay.

Because looking at BART beyond the threat of strike, the system actually has the 3rd highest "FareBox Recovery" in the nation at above 60%. That means BART covers 60% of the costs of operations via its fares/fees we pay to ride BART. Most of the rest of the money is recovered thru taxes and subsidy (and I'm assuming a bit of advertisement). This relatively high national FBR is all occurring with limited service offerings, over a very widespread map. 

(crowded nyc subway)

Not surprisingly, NYC has the highest FBR in the country (over 70%), and this is of course due to a couple things we don't have here in the Bay Area. NYC's denser population, and close proximity of neighborhoods allows for a much greater efficiency (closer stops, less cars, more riders per capita) and so NYC subway is also able to also charge less. Win, win, win (Imagine if San Francisco had a subway system. No more parking tickets!). 

Well, we obviously can't shrink the Bay Area and make it more densely populated like NYC (perhaps if we got rid of the water but prob not a good idea), but couldn't we encourage more people to ride BART? Currently, only about 05% of the Bay Area's 7.2 million population rides BART on a daily basis, and during the weekend its about 2% (or less) of the overall population. Of course this includes areas that are not currently serviced by BART, however it seems to me that we've still got to be able to increase these numbers with some sensible adjustments and cutting-edge creativity. Although 375,000 people ride BART on average (mon-fri), the Bay, not entirely unlike LA remains very car centric. And while BART is fairly efficient it could be much more efficient, and much more enticing.

In regards to efficiency and enticement, BART could offer services that have different rates/pricing depending on the day/time. I'm not entirely certain how this would look but people are willing to pay more for convenience and necessity. For example, folks in SF pay "peak" prices for uber cabs. I'm not saying BART should spike prices during commutes (perhaps the opposite would make sense?), but maybe prices are raised slightly for express services, major sporting events and concerts, and services after midnight (at least on weekends) when people want to enter or leave major cities such as SF, Oakland, or San Jose. Wouldn't you pay a few more bucks to jump on express train? Or, avoid a DUI? 

(the Key System - before BART)

Moreover, how does BART not have "express" trains? BART claims they do not currently have the track space to accommodate express trains and maintain sufficient ridership for the non-commuters who need more frequent stops. However, during commute hours the large majority of people riding do not need frequent stops but rather access to main hubs. BART literally only started officially "looking into" the idea of express service in 2012 but yet has been around since 1972. (Note: Way back in the day, well before BART, the Bay Area was serviced by an amazingly cheap, clean, and efficient electronic transit rail called the Key system, which ultimately became a victim of the automobile industry and the nations obsession with cars)   

So, to me, the biggest problem with BART is not the employees salaries (avg. employee makes $80,000 with overtime, which mean many make much less than that. 80k is a very good wage but as you've probably noticed, the Bay is expensive!)… The bigger issue is the lack of leadership of the BART board over the years and it's inability to innovate and elevate the Bay Area in terms of transit when compared to other major metropolitan regions of the world. The fact that BART's Fare Box Recovery is the 3rd highest in the country is impressive at first glance but it's not so much the boards doing and much more to do with two basic factors. 

#1. Bart is kinda pricey and people are forced to pay these high fares that contribute to the FBR. 

#2. A healthy chunk of the people who live in the Bay are solely dependent upon BART for their commute, and many of us "Bay-Areans" in general are savvy enough to want to ride instead of drive.

(Tokyo transit agents pushing riders into train)

Indeed it's definitely not the worst system in the world but it could be much better, and smarter. Just because NYC and Paris metro (for example) have the advantage of denser/closer proximity, that doesn't mean BART should settle for the basics. While the Bay will never be like places such as Hong Kong or Tokyo, who have transit systems with over 100% FBR, we also don't desire to be so densely packed in like rats in a cage. That being said, I'd still like to be able to go to see a show at the FOX theater in Oakland or the New Parish and not have to scurry to catch the last BART before I'm stranded without a ride and forced to hail a $90 taxi. I'm sure a ton of folks living in the greater Bay Area would love to travel into the city at night if they didn't always have to drive, or find a place to stay. This would also make night ridership more safe, as more people that ride after 10pm would discourage criminal activity. BART would also be able to hire more transit police to work these later hours (hopefully the kind that are properly trained, and not quick on the trigger as we have tragically seen in the past). 

All of this musing comes as BART employees are about to go on strike again, with their main grievances being that they want safer work environment (less naked-guy ninjas), as well as not having to pay into their pension, or increases in health care costs. It might sound sort of crazy that BART employees don't currently pay into their pension but again, this was negotiated previously by the illustrious BART board and employees would argue they made other concessions. I'd also offer that anyone who pays into a pension currently and says they wouldn't rather have a deal that allows them to not pay, is probably fibbing. There is definitely a happy "extra medium" that both sides can agree upon. 

Overall though I think if we have any major issues with BART, it should be with the boards lack of leadership, and the services less than optimal Metropolitan offerings. Furthermore, if we are going to get upset with income inequality in America, aiming at BART employees who average 80k per year in one of the most expensive places to live in the world, is probably not the best place to start. We might want to first take a look at money in politics beyond "corporate personhood,"  including the revolving door in DC, and the "too big to fail" giants on Wall Street.