A recent report by the Alameda County Civil Grand Jury shed a harsh light on BART and its failure to address the issues that continue to drive down ridership.

Crime, dirty train cars and stations, and an inability to rein in fare evaders threaten to marginalize the agency even further as commuters chose other alternatives to get to work, the Grand Jury reported.

These problems have been known at BART for some time, and are in fact at the heart of my decision to cast the lone vote against the $2 billion agency budget for next year.

The Bay Area is blessed with a regional economy entering its 11th year of expansion. Ridership on BART should be increasing, yet the average number of daily riders has declined precipitously over the past few years, and is expected to continue to decline below the benchmark 2013 levels.

As the Grand Jury pointed out, the reason is clear: BART has not sufficiently invested in ensuring safe and clean trains and stations. When the level of service declines, so does ridership.

Despite continuing this pattern of not adequately addressing quality-of-life issues, the new budget increases fares 5.4 percent starting in January. In total, the majority of the Board of Directors agreed to increase fares 18 percent over the next seven years.

I simply could not vote for a budget and raise fares without a multiyear plan to address the ongoing drop in ridership.

During the budget discussions, I proposed allocating resources to steam clean regional stations that have been neglected in favor of stations in San Francisco. But my efforts failed to get majority support. I was told BART couldn’t afford it. Meanwhile, the agency continues to lose millions of dollars each year to fare evaders.

The Grand Jury claim that as many as 15 percent of commuters skip out on fares has been strongly denied by BART administrators, who peg the revenue loss at about 5 percent each year. But even if you accept the lower estimate, that translates into $25 million a year in losses.

Investing in new fare gates to make it difficult if not impossible to skip the fare seems like a common sense thing to do.

A $100 million investment in new gates — one of the proposals currently on the table — would be easily recovered in a few years given the scope of the current losses. But the majority of directors continue to drag their feet on committing the funds needed to solve the problem once and for all. Not only that, but the new stations in Warm Springs and Santa Clara County incorporate the same ineffective fare gate technology — testament to the agency’s systemic failure to address its most pressing problem.

One item in the budget that was easy to support was the addition of 19 BART police officer positions, which will increase safety and improve the rider experience. BART is also piloting other innovative programs to crack down on cheaters, including stationing uniformed agency personnel at fare gates during peak hours.

While these efforts are reason for hope, it’s clear not enough is being done to address declining ridership. If there is a recession, ridership will surely slip even further unless these core issues are addressed now.

The recent hiring of an inspector general to oversee BART spending and increase efficiencies is reason for optimism. BART needs a third-party expert to audit the system and point out where resources could be better allocated.

Most importantly, BART needs to work strategically and develop a multiyear schedule of improvements to reverse years of declining service and ridership.

BART Director Liz Ames represents District 6, stretching from South Hayward to Fremont.