
|
Los Angeles City Guides
|
Article History
SAN FRANCISCO (Map, News) - Although the cash-strapped Muni system stands to make more than $300 million in advertising revenue over the next 20 years from a new bus shelter contract, critics say the plan violates the spirit of an anti-billboard measure passed by voters in 2002.
Three different companies — CBS Outdoor, Cemusa and Clear Channel — competed for the contract. The current deal expires in December.
Clear Channel was chosen, according to Muni Executive Director Nathaniel Ford, because the money it guarantees will go to the transit agency and because it offers such benefits as solar-powered lighting, audio technology for the visually impaired and lights at bus stops to signal drivers that a passenger wants to get on board.
Mayor Gavin Newsom called it an “extraordinary contract.”
The current deal, first negotiated 20 years ago with CBS Outdoor, provides The City with an annual payment of $400,000. Under the Clear Channel deal, which will go before the Municipal Transportation Agency board of directors for approval Tuesday, the company agrees to pay Muni a minimum average payment of $15.3 million a year over the life of the contract. The agreement also requires approval from the Port Commission and the Board of Supervisors.
“I know I am setting myself up here, but Muni has to and will improve, and this revenue stream will help us accomplish that,” Newsom said.
Muni faces yearly deficits, with next year’s financial shortfall estimated at about $50 million.
As part of the contract, Clear Channel would eventually replace San Francisco’s 1,100 transit shelters and 39 kiosks and has the option of adding 400 new shelters and 111 kiosks, with Muni’s approval.
Critics of the contract say ads on transit shelters and kiosks deluge San Franciscans with advertisements they already said they didn’t want in 2002, when 77 percent of voters passed an anti-billboard measure.
Supervisor Jake McGoldrick has authored a ballot measure for November that would allow San Franciscans to weigh in on whether they want more general advertising on The City’s streets.
The Clear Channel contract is for a 15-year term with one five-year option to extend. If Muni stays with the contract until 2027, it would receive a minimum amount of $306 million over the 20-year period, and a possible total of $381 million.
Anticipated gross revenues for the contract add up to $771 million over the 20-year period, according to the deal documents.
beslinger@examiner.com
Key provisions of The City's transit shelter agreement with Clear Channel:
» San Francisco will receive annual advertising revenue profits of $15.3 million annually, at minimum, for a 20-year period.
» The City will receive annual payments of $500,000 in administrative fees, $200,000 in marketing fees, and $265,000 for Arts Commission.
» Clear Channel will have the exclusive right to sell print advertising on transit shelters and kiosks.
» Clear Channel will replace San Francisco’s 1,100 existing transit shelters and 39 kiosks, within six years.
» Clear Channel may install an additional 400 shelters and 111 kiosks, with Muni approval.
» Clear Channel is responsible for maintenance of shelters and kiosks, including removing graffiti, stickers and litter.
Not ranked |
EMAIL ME THIS STORY |
ARTICLE HISTORY |
Sports
Business |
Real Estate Family Movies and Books Venues, Sports and Music Concerts, Artists and Tickets Be Inspired - Quotes and Stories |
Comments from Examiner Readers
11:39 AM MST on Tue., Oct. 23, 2007 re: "Muni’s ad-space issue: Sign of the times"
Report as inappropriate
10:29 AM MST on Thu., Oct. 11, 2007
re: "Muni’s ad-space issue: Sign of the times"
Report as inappropriate
10:46 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
4:49 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
2:48 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
12:41 PM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
11:04 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
10:18 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
9:57 AM MST on Fri., Aug. 31, 2007
re: "Cash-strapped Muni offered shelter-ad windfall"
Report as inappropriate
homer j. simpsoy said:
every time MUNI tries to act like a business and do something to enhance revenues and NOT pick our pockets with fare increases and taxes, someone is against it. Then they try and pick our pockets and someone is against it. Sometimes the people need to shut the frak up and let MUNI do something right for a change instead of just bitching,that means you wealthy ladies of pacific heights. go ride your limo to the opera.
133 agree | 113 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Native San Franciscan said:
The supervisors would be fools to turn this contract down. I found Dee Dee Workman's comments laughable where she said “While they line their pockets, San Francisco residents suffer.” I wonder how many times she has been late for work or late for an appoitment due to a late Muni bus. I would rather "suffer" an advertisement at a Muni stop then suffer being chronicly late for work due to the revenue for increased bus service that won't come in if the supes reject this contract. Not only will Clear Channal pay alot more money to Muni operations then CBS Outdoor did, it will also provide bus stop enhancements for the blind, Nextbus installations at all bus stops and a contractual commitment to clean the shelter at least twice a week. Dee Dee Workmand should be less concerned about the "blight" of advertising are more cocerned about the blight of graffiti at bus stops and people who cant get to work on time due to the lack of buses and drivers.
149 agree | 133 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
as a 29 year resident of s.f., through better and worse economic times, MUNI operations have remained, more or less, problematic. i believe MUNI is "institutionally" ill and money is only one component of healing and improving this agency's performance.
162 agree | 126 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
MUNI should be privatized. Start with the Metro. Next, privatize the station agents, outsource the janitorial work. Private companies would never tolerate the crap we put up with. MUNI is like urban school districts. They have far too many employees doing things that privcate business can do.
165 agree | 171 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Just keep throwing money at MUNI. It doesn't matter if its municipal funds or that from the private sector - just keep hoping that something sticks, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha. Oh ya, betcha a fare increase is comin too!!!!!!!
161 agree | 185 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Huh, the Board of Sups raising fares, never. I thought this was a transit first town.
200 agree | 159 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Lincoln Navigator said:
Rather than take advertising dollars, the Supes would rather have us pay higher MUNI fares or ream the property tax payers some more. For crying out loud, take the corporate dough and make MUNI better. I can't believe anyone would pay to advertise on MUNI, but if they're suckers, take them to the bank!
153 agree | 123 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
San Francisco is not a "world class" city, it is a mid size american city that struggles to keep up. Bad policing, poor public transportation, homelessness, grafitti the list is long. San Francisco exists in spite of itself. If selling as space on a bus shelter will bring in money you can rest assured that those "in charge" will find a way to get it. In spite of the citizens.
169 agree | 111 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
How in the world can MUNI be strapped for cash????? It is a never ending cash cow with little to no improvement. MUNI gets, I believe, most of the City's budget revenues and it still can't operate in a fashion befitting a world class city. Something just isn't right here!!!!! The Mayor keeps saying, like mayor's past that things are better. I don't see it. Then again, he says the homeless situation is great, I don't see that AT ALL! A city that can't even keep its streets clean which is the most simple of city services will not, I am afraid, be able to do anything about MUNI's woes. Unfortunate, but true.
137 agree | 117 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree