Facing a looming $320 million budget deficit that has forced layoffs and service cuts, the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency has been hard-pressed for good news. One bright spot: the crackdown on fare dodgers. Thanks to a beefed-up force of 56 inspectors, revenue per rider in February was up 6% year-over-year, and fare evasion was down 30%, the agency reported at an April 15 board meeting.
But a closer look raises concerns about cost effectiveness, inspector absenteeism, low citation rates, and the agency’s limited confidence in its own fare evasion estimate.
In 2024, Muni recorded 158 million trips. Last year, the agency conservatively estimated that 20% of riders were evading the fare, translating to more than 30 million unpaid rides.
Such widespread fare evasion suggests inspectors weren’t short on ticketing opportunities. But last year, only 8% of inspections resulted in a citation, even as inspectors reported that 20% of the people they talked to hadn’t paid. SFMTA officials maintain that the agency’s goal is for most identified fare evaders to receive citations as well as materials about payment options.
Yet a roster of 29 non-supervisory inspectors who have completed training issued just 4,700 citations last month — that’s just eight citations per each inspector’s daily shift, according to The Standard’s analysis of the most recently available data.
One reason for the low citation count is that inspectors are not spending all of their time on enforcement. The agency’s goal is for 65% of working hours to be devoted to inspections; the remaining time should be spent on “meetings pre- and post-assignment, traveling to assignments, breaks, and occasional work as ambassadors during citywide events,” officials said.
Meanwhile, 13 of 56 inspectors, trainees, and supervisors were on a leave of absence “due to workers’ compensation and illness” as of April 7, according to data obtained via a public records request.
“Minus the citations or the rules, just [inspectors] being visible and present to the ridership has a huge impact,” Jonathan Rewers, who was laid off last week as SFMTA’s chief strategy officer, told the agency’s board this month.
The average full-time fare inspector makes more than $130,000 per year in pay and benefits, yet the force has struggled with recruitment. Training an inspector can take up to five months, and up to 30%-40% of recent hires quit within months as they “realize how difficult the job is,” Rewers told the board.
Absenteeism has historically been a problem at the agency. A 2013 audit flagged the SFMTA as having the second-highest off-work rate of any large city agency and said its processes for monitoring long-term absences and return to work needed improvement. Citing privacy concerns, Muni officials did not provide details as to why 23% of inspectors were on leave.
In spite of these challenges, officials point to the large decline in fare evasion achieved by inspectors working in difficult conditions. Board members commended the inspectors, citing instances in which they had witnessed compassionate handling of belligerent fare-skippers.
However, officials declined to provide a current fare evasion figure, saying only that it has dropped “nearly 30%” from the July 2024 peak (which has not been publicly shared).
The agency said it has made methodology changes to its evasion estimates and faces disruptions after last week’s layoffs. (Riders who flee inspectors are not counted, and officials acknowledge that the reported figures likely are underestimates.)
As the SFMTA continues to aim for 65 inspectors by year’s end — the most it has ever had — it’s not clear whether the program will pay for itself as projected costs increase to $8.4 million per year by July. The deterrence push could increase annual revenue by up to $5 million per year, according to board materials. Calculating how many riders need to be deterred from nonpayment to break even isn’t possible without knowing the current fare evasion rate and the percentage of nonpaying riders who qualify for discount programs.
“Are we getting money back from this program, or is it just another cost?” Dylan Fabris of the advocacy group SF Transit Riders asked at the board meeting, noting that staffing levels were increasing before the rollout of new payment systems, which may reduce evasion.
Fares continue to decline as a revenue source for Muni. Ten years ago, fares represented 30% of SFMTA’s operating budget; today, they make up 7%. Aiming to maintain high ridership and avoid burdening low-income residents, officials have limited fare increases despite inflation. The price of a single-ride adult fare has gone up 22% as labor costs (which account for 60%-70% of the operating budget) have risen 53% in the last decade.
This has some riders calling for free transit for all.
“Fares are just performative at this point,” Aditya Bhumbla, one of the individuals behind the social media account UnfareSF, which reports sightings of fare inspectors, said.
Bhumbla said he always pays the fare but doesn’t want to see low-income riders subjected to enforcement and encourages them to “just leave” when approached by Muni cops.
Officials say they offer affordable options for low-income riders, including the Lifeline Pass, free youth rides, and reduced fares for seniors and disabled riders.
They’ve also heard from frustrated riders who see that many individuals aren’t tapping the ticket reader but say many of them are eligible for free rides, are paying via MuniMobile (which doesn’t require a tap), or have a monthly pass.
The agency is planning a “Don’t Be a Dodger” campaign to explain the impact of riders not paying their fares, believing that if there’s one thing that unites San Franciscans, it’s hatred of the L.A. Dodgers.
Jamaine Sanders, riding the bus Tuesday afternoon to meet his probation officer, was asked how many tickets a day he thought the average fare inspector gave out.
“None?” he offered. “They give me warnings. They’re laid back. They’re like the rest of us — just doing enough to get by.”