California News

Multimedia News

Best NFL hits
20 photos
Chicago Bears linebacker Lance Briggs (55) sa...
American League baseball highlights
20 photos
Los Angeles Angels third baseman Chone Figgin...
'Body Of Lies' world premiere
11 photos
Actor Leonardo DiCaprio attends the world pre...
Offbeat festivals
10 photos
A devotee of the Chinese Shrine Bang Neow pre...
Pop tarts
12 photos
A model wears a creation by French designer J...

Commuter checks could be mandated in S.F.

Jul 4, 2008 3:00 AM (94 days ago) by Joshua Sabatini, The Examiner
This story ranks # 5,455 of 11,981
Related Topics: SAN FRANCISCO
Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi has proposed legislation that would force employers to offer their workers commuter checks. The checks would be offered as an employee benefit but cost the employer administrative fees.
(Examiner file photo)
Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi has proposed legislation that would force employers to offer their workers commuter checks. The checks would be offered as an employee benefit but cost the employer administrative fees.

SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Matthew Quach is one of many San Francisco residents who said business owners should be forced to provide pretax deductions for employee commuting expenses.

“I would drive less and save the environment,” he said Thursday.

Under a federal law, employers can provide employees the benefit of deducting up to $115 of pretaxed wages for a commuter check, which an employee can then use to purchase monthly transit passes.

But San Francisco officials, in an aim to become a transit-first city, are pushing legislation that would force employers in The City to offer the benefit of commuter checks. Introduced by Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi, the bill is pending before the board and is expected to be debated in August.

This story continues below
Advertisement

According to the bill, a commuter check would be provided as vouchers for transit passes. Money is deducted from an employee’s salary and is used by the employer to purchase the commuter checks. The checks are offered free of charge as an employee benefit while the disadvantage to an employer are the administrative costs in offering the program.

Under the voluntary federal program, the savings vary. A $45 Muni fast pass would cost an employee about $32, while a $64 BART ticket costs about $45, according to the Department of the Environment, which contracts with a vendor to process any worker employed by The City that chooses to use the benefit.

But many business owners say the benefit of commuter checks is not well-known.

Steve Sarver, owner of San Francisco Soup Kitchen, said he offers employees commuter benefits and is supportive of the federal program, but against any requirement that forces businesses to offer it.

“I am in favor of the government promoting it more,” he said.

Deputy Director of the Department of Environment David Assmann said the department contacted 900 large businesses in the past year, asking them to offer the benefit. He said there are about 8,000 businesses that currently offer the benefit, but there is no way to determine how many employees use it.

San Francisco resident Nick Bonnell said he has used a commuter check in the past, and thought Mirkarimi’s legislation was a good idea, but understood why smaller businesses would be reluctant to take on additional responsibilities.

“Large companies should sponsor that,” he said. “If it helps people get off the road, why not?”

Quach said commuter checks would allow him to sock funds away for retirement or “maybe to go to lunch.” He started working for a coffee chain restaurant about one month ago and said he doesn’t think his employer offers the benefit since he was not told about it.

jsabatini@sfexaminer.com

Do as I say, not as I do: City workers not enrolling in program

While San Francisco may force businesses to offer a commuter check program for employees, it is falling short of enrolling city workers in its own pretax transit voucher plan.

This fiscal year, the Department of the Environment set a goal of enrolling 7,800 city employees in a commuter check program that allows use of pretax wages to defray costs of public transit. Only 3,900 enrolled.

David Assmann, deputy director of the Department of the Environment, said that despite the unmet target, the department has made significant progress but he acknowledged that “it’s still hard to get people out of their cars.”

Last year, a survey of city workers found that about 40 percent commuted to work alone in a car. The city currently employs approximately 28,000 workers; about 3,000 replied.

Approximately 24 percent commuted to work using BART, while about 20 percent took the bus.

“We are not happy with that at all,” Assmann said.

City employees, he said, are starting to show more interest in the benefit program because of the rise in gasoline prices, and he expects The City will continue to enroll more employees. Almost half of the 28,000 workers employed by The City live outside of San Francisco.

City workers who enroll in the so-called commuter benefits program can deduct up to $115 per month from their paychecks, pretax, to pay for transit as well as vanpool expenses, according to the Department of Environment.

The number of city workers who enrolled in the commuter check program does not include those city workers who may opt not to fill out the paperwork to enroll in the program, but instead purchase their transit tickets out of pocket. — Joshua Sabatini

By the numbers

The City may require employers to offer a commuter-check program for workers.

$45 Cost of a Muni Fast Pass

$45 and $60 Cost of BART High Value Tickets, which include bonus rides

$20-$110 Range of commuter check values available

13 Months a commuter check is valid

$42, $63 and $84 Value of commuter checks available for BART parking

$115 Maximum monthly amount that can be deducted from paycheck for transit

$220 Maximum monthly amount that can be deducted from paycheck for parking

$500 Maximum yearly savings for transit commuter checks

$1,000 Maximum yearly savings for parking commuter checks

Source: Accor Services, BART, Muni

Add a Comment


Name: (required)
Comments:
characters left
Comments are regulated by the Terms of Use.

Comments from Examiner Readers

1:40 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 8, 2008 re: "Transit law gets green light"

Examiner Reader said:
I don't know what small business would have more than 20 employees, but I suppose this targets larger businesses or chain businesses that do not provide transit benefits (ie Safeway or larger restaurants). I think the City should make its own workers participate in a program like this instead of handing out free passes or parking spaces.

1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree

10:50 AM MST on Wed., Aug. 6, 2008 re: "Transit law gets green light"

Gretchen said:
Bad, Bad, Bad! Are we really trying to drive small businesses out of SF? First we nail them with health insurance costs - OK, that's expensive but is a social necessity. But now we nail them with transit benefits? At what point do they say "Enough, I'm outta here!" If you want big business benefits for everyone, then only big businesses can afford to do business here, and SF will be one giant, albeit beautiful, Mall. Is that what we want? High payroll taxes, insurance costs, transit costs, and all this for a city that has the highest per capita budget in the United States! Does anyone know that? With a 6.5 BILLION dollar budget, that works out to a cost of $8,000 per man, woman and child in SF - more than LA, NY, etc. So now we throw another expense onto small businesses. What's wrong with this picture? Vote out our "Progressive" supervisors before the city implodes completely. Sigh....

1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:52 AM MST on Wed., Aug. 6, 2008 re: "Transit law gets green light"

Examiner Reader said:
This is why it's called a small business and not a big one where benefits are galore. If a small business can penny pinch their employees, they have no choice but go elsewhere later. A new law can't force a small business to provide benefits to their employees, they'll go belly up.

1 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:42 PM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008 re: "Commuter checks could be mandated in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
I'm not familiar with the Federal Law that is referenced in the article. Please specify the Federal Law.

2 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:58 AM MST on Wed., Jul. 23, 2008 re: "Commuter checks could be mandated in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
A smart proposal for Commuter Checks or something similar. I work for SFSU, and while this legislation is does not have any jurisdiction on State of California property, we are the only California State University offering this program to its employees. It is pre-taxed from your payroll, and I felt it was simple enough to spend a couple of minutes to fill out the paperwork and place my order online. And presto! My check came in the mail. Even easier, instead of asking for a check, you can have an actual pass, and even BART tickets mailed to you. Translink now offers automatic uploading of electronic cash to your account too. This means you don't have to hassle with claiming the check.

0 agree | 3 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:32 AM MST on Mon., Jul. 21, 2008 re: "Commuters ready to launch"

Examiner Reader said:
Ferry project sounds like a good one. With the the cities and state broke, how will it be paid for?

2 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:41 PM MST on Mon., Jul. 7, 2008 re: "Federal bill to include $13.5M for S.F. transportation"

Examiner Reader said:
While this program could have considerable benefits, how is MUNI going to handle the increased ridership when it appears fully-challenged servicing existing ridership?

Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
2:18 PM MST on Mon., Jul. 7, 2008 re: "Commuter checks could be mandated in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
Ah the communist nation of San Francisco and Comrade Smikirmi is at it again. I don't think they should require small businesses to offer this to employees. If Matthew the coffee shop barista wants to be paid for his commute, then he should find an office job. Those companies offer commuter benefits. When will the regulation of small business in SF end?

0 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
12:28 PM MST on Mon., Jul. 7, 2008 re: "Commuter checks could be mandated in S.F."

Examiner Reader said:
Getting more city employees out of their cars is actually quite easy: cut the number of parking spaces available to employees, or make them more expensive.

2 agree | 0 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:14 AM MST on Mon., May. 12, 2008 re: "Caltrain deaths a fact of engineers’ lives"

Examiner Reader said:
Regarding what grumpy Martin Engel said in the first comment. Maybe Caltrain has a legitimate concern in wanting to cover their a**. I know for a fact that the families many of those yahoos who walk around the downed crossing gates and right in front of the trains, ignoring blaring horns, lights and bells seek out the first ambulance chasing lawyer they can find and sue the railroad. Personal responsibility in today's world? You've got to be kidding! It was all that bad old railroad's fault, even if their beloved was drunk and laying on the tracks or had his head half way up his you-know-what!

2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
5:53 PM MST on Wed., Apr. 30, 2008 re: "Caltrain cameras would aid investigation process"

Martin Engel said:
Cameras? A million dollar grant? Half a million for the cameras? Why? Will that make the tracks any safer? I don't think so. Then, what are they for? They will relieve Caltrain and its personnel from any liability by documenting how none of the accidents/fatalities are their fault. In Mike Rosenberg's article, he even uses the headline to make my point, only in a much more neutral way. (To put it bluntly, it's a free "cover-their-a**" investment!) The other reason is that getting "free" money, like grants, is what government organizations do. Getting and spending the money is more important than solving any problem. The money comes from the 1-B bond issue, one billion of which was earmarked for "public-transit system safety enhancements." How cameras will make the train corridor safer is an explanation I would like to hear. Fencing? Four-Quad Gates? Sure. But cameras? Post-mortem?

2 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
11:35 AM MST on Tue., Apr. 29, 2008 re: "Sixth death on tracks in 2008 is woman, 63"

Examiner Reader said:
Engineer not conductor. Engineers are opereating the train.

3 agree | 1 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
10:39 AM MST on Fri., Apr. 25, 2008 re: "Bay Area public transit as popular as ever"

Examiner Reader said:
Be happy that people with insight and vision found a way to agree and build BART decades ago...I moved to Hawaii (from SF) and my commute wastes 3 hours each day on Oahu (just to get to work) by car. If I take the bus, add an hour each way. It's just as fast to bicycle the entire distance (35 miles to Waianae). Why? Because our city council killed "rail transit" 16 years ago...and they're are still not in agreement! I would recommend bicycling to others but the lack of adequate (safe) bike paths makes it so dangerous I won't even take my children riding to the beach...so stop whining and ride BART, MUNI, or your BIKE...It's the only long term solution for a sustainable future

3 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
8:32 PM MST on Thu., Apr. 24, 2008 re: "Bay Area public transit as popular as ever"

Examiner Reader said:
I'm looking forward to the silver lining, when some of the new, more affluent, better-connected riders pitch a fit about how difficult and miserable it is to get around on the bus. No insult to the drivers: you're stuck, too, and make my day when you try to get us all on board and where we need to go.

1 agree | 2 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
9:03 AM MST on Thu., Apr. 24, 2008 re: "Bay Area public transit as popular as ever"

Examiner Reader said:
I wish I can believe that people are starting to care about our environment by taking public transit, but I think it has more to do with high gas prices than anything else.

8 agree | 4 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
5:06 PM MST on Thu., Feb. 14, 2008 re: "Lack of funds may dead-end transit projects"

Examiner Reader said:
MUNI's inability to service existing lines didn't stop the T-line from being built. The city will likely continue such transit line construction to create the illusion that adequate transit service exists in any number of neighborhoods, for any number of housing developments. As far as I can tell, these new lines are being built (as selling points) to satisfy developers as much as serving ridership.

53 agree | 50 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
6:07 PM MST on Mon., Dec. 31, 2007 re: "Federal bill to include $13.5M for S.F. transportation"

Examiner Reader said:
I'm with Seven on this one. How is yet another MUNI line going to be adequately serviced when MUNI cannot even adequately serve existing lines?

53 agree | 59 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
3:29 PM MST on Mon., Dec. 31, 2007 re: "Federal bill to include $13.5M for S.F. transportation"

Seven said:
Couldn't we skip the central subway and use the money to actually improve Muni?

55 agree | 55 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Advertisement