The situation that SF faces is more money or less service. Unless you're for more money, you're for less service.
There are plenty of things you could identify about BART specifically which could be changed to save money. BART has plenty of board meetings you can attend to pitch your ideas. If they don't like them, they have a legislative process where you pitch your bureaucratic reform proposal directly to the public. It seems like they'll be receptive!
But "I wish BART were better-run" is not a policy, and as such it cannot be a solution to a policy problem. Good management is not natural: millions of people have spent whole careers investigating what good management is, and implementing it. Absent any concrete policies that BART could *feasibly* implement (so, excluding things outside of BART's control, such as "overhaul the way public sector agencies interface with unions in California) the only options are more money or less service.
"I don't like how BART is spending my money, I don't want them to get any more of mine" is a proposal for less service. And I'm actually perfectly fine with people making the case for less service: the Bay Area isn't *that* dense on average, and you can have a theory of change which involves higher tolls or better bus service (which comes through different agencies).
But what I don't like is advocacy for less service while ducking the question of what that would mean or what replaces it. And I see a lot of that.
Anthropic is spending $750k to raise our property and sales taxes and give more money to our poorly run transit systems.
$500k for higher property taxes
$250k for a 1% SF sales tax hike
Love public transit but hate how poorly ours is run, I don’t think money solves it.