SF Controller's Office does benchmarking reports: transit comparison

The most recent report on the SF MUNI transit system compares the system to ten other US cities:

Dallas; Denver; Houston; Minneapolis;  Pittsburgh; Portland, Oregon; Sacramento; San Diego; San Jose, California; and Seattle.

Summary:

-- While the SFMTA has higher operating costs than all of its peers for light rail and
trolleybus service, it operates approximately 3 to 14 times the number of vehicles than its peers and the data indicate that the SFMTA's operating costs are commensurate with the level of service provided.

-- The SFMTA’s light rail vehicles, buses, and trolleybuses travel at a slower average speed through the transportation network than transit vehicles in the peer systems. However, the data show a correlation between average vehicle speed and the number of passengers served per mile, and the SFMTA's operations again appear consistent with the level of service provided.

-- Transit fares in San Francisco are consistently lower than fares in most of the peer cities.

-- Compared to the peer vehicle fleets, the SFMTA’s light rail vehicles and buses are generally less energy efficient on an in-use basis; are generally older, and typically
travel a fewer number of miles between vehicle failures.

-----------
In other San Francisco transportation news, the MUNI system has dropped the proposal to triple the fare on the historic streetcar line, the F line ("Plan would triple cost of riding S.F.'s historic streetcars" and "Proposal to triple fare on F-line eliminated," San Francisco Chronicle).

And despite all the complaining that you hear from SF residents about the quality of their transit system (most outsiders think it is quite good), a recent survey finds that customer satisfaction is reasonably high ("Muni riders generally satisfied, survey finds," San Francisco Chronicle).