As for grants vs member dues: I've worked in the grant-funded world, and it isn't fun (see: 'The Revolution will not be Funded'). Member dues gives us the latitude to respond to member interest and set our own path, not dictated by funding cycles and PO's.

The third point is, in all honesty the SFBC advocates for muni and pedestrians, but that's not our mission and if we spent too much time on it, many of our 10,000 members wouldn't be happy with their money going towards that. They pay dues to care about bikes, and while the connection is obvious to S'blong readers and commenters and staff, it's lees clear to many average cyclists out there, even though it is moving in that direction.

I'm not saying YOU should go start another org first and foremost-- we'd love you to help shape the SFBC-- but there are a few folks around town and commenters on s'blog who spend their time complaining and attacking only, rather than trying to build a better city. I'd love to see a strong member-based Transit Riders Union happen in SF- like LA's BRU, or NYC's Straphangers. I think it's the only way we'll get some appropriate funding for these necessary services.

But I was put off by the language of the email. So (since you asked) here's an idea: I would be much more willing to donate money (beyond my yearly fee), if you would send emails that are upfront and say, in fact, that "fundraising is a natural part of a 10-person full-time organization, unless you wanted us to have our policies dictated by corporate fund's grant processes". If you can't make ends meet with member contributions, then say so. Please don't turn into Greenpeace or PETA - and I say that as an environmentalist vegan.

Saying things like "if you want to see more or different actions, you can start your own group" cuts both ways. On the one hand it's true of course, but on the other, it is a sort of "get with the program or get out" which in fact is often used to discourage discussions and dissent.

I don't want to start an org. But I do want to keep the group I am a member of, honest Thanks for listening.

Fundraising is a natural part of a 10-person full-time organization, unless you wanted us to have our policies dictated by corporate fund's grant processes.

All members were and are invited to participate beyond donation-- and welcome ideas of better ways to organize/mobilize if you'd like to provide them.

If that's not enough, advocacy isn't a monopoly. As WOBO did with EBBC, if you want to see more or different actions, you can start your own group. And if you want it to be multi-modal, as Matthew recommended, get on it- I'll gladly join you to fight for transit and walking, too.

I was pretty shocked to receive an email from the SFBC the other day that said: "Just two weeks ago, the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition won a near-doubling of bike lanes and passage of the city's most ambitious Bike Plan. Now, we are asking you to make the most of this historic moment by helping us take San Francisco to the next level."

This is troubling on many levels. The SFBC did not single-handedly conceive or write this plan. And nothing was "won", but merely a long delay (which could have been avoided if those who should have known better, would have paid attention) was ended. And again, this step was not "won" by the SFBC alone. But now they are sending emails which take sole credit for this "victory", for the purposes of fund raising. Because yes, the email equates "taking SF to the next level" not with direct activism, or biking more, but with donating money to the SFBC.

Of course, this is straight out of the book of the modern non-profit, it seems. All "successful" non-profits unfortunately seem to go the way of turning into fundraising machines, where most of their members' only "activism" is to reach for their checkbooks to make even more "victories" possible.

This is seriously worrying and I fear that if this trend continues, then the SFBC indeed might turn into something that claims to be the sole voice of bikers in this city, that will strike deals "on our behalf" without consulting us, earn questionable "victories" and discourage real and vigorous debate within the community in the name of "unity".

I hope I'm wrong.

San Francisco activism is very non-profit, mediating and clientelist in character with little participatory democracy. I'd take issue with your assessment of the SFBC, for an organization their size, they are not very effective per member as they misuse their relatively vast resources focusing on minutae of interest, ignoring the big picture.

The best way to make advocacy work is for the folks with the most skin in the game to be at the table. But that threatens entrenched bureaucracy which has all but captured and neutralized advocates.

Organizing Muni would be interesting. I'd always thought it best to organize by line, creating line committees which would keep tabs on what's working and not on the line. Organizing these committees would easy if folks who rode each line were given the resources to organize while riding. I'd brought this up at the TEP, as a means to ensure that the MTA had boots on the ground, as it were, but we are apparently reduced to "talk to the MTA hand." (sorry Judson).

But organizing Muni riders requires "significant initial capitalization."

-marc

Anywho...

1) James Council fell asleep at the wheel while on duty as a Sheriff's deputy and killed two cyclists who were riding single file on the shoulder. He was given 4 months home arrest. The bike people wanted that douchnozzle thrown in jail for a long long time, we certainly didn't get that.

2) The bike people get a lot of stuff because

A) They show up. We were in a war with Caltrain and we beat them by going to the JPB meetings over and over and over and beating the JPB over the head. Not one person showed up to comment on two proposed fare increases during that timeframe and they sailed through. Caltrain threatened to kill Gilroy service (not a bike issue), all hell broke loose, Caltrain backed off.

B) They participate. City riddled with potholes? Riders go around, mark them, note them, bring the list to the MTA. Are the N-Judah riders taking detailed (non-anecdotal) statistics of service disruptions and bringing them to the BoS?

C) Painting bike lanes is cheap and the pavement is not represented by a union that refuses to concede anything, even work rules that offend everyone but the drivers themselves.

Rest assured Greg, if I were suddenly elevated to Mayor of San Francisco my number one priority would be MUNI, not bike lanes. Fortunately, there are plenty of civilians willing to do heavy lifting on the bike lane issue. Unfortunately there aren't a lot of politicians willing to take bold moves for MUNI.

But what I really want to know is Rob Anderson's position on the scripting debate?

Could the bold, anonymous "Greg" provide some specifics about why I'm supposedly a liar? What's really offensive is rationalizing the city's lawless behavior. At least Marc understands that the city behaved irresponsibly in trying to push the Bicycle Plan through the process without any environmental review.

"So long as people like me, for whom riding a bike for every single thing is no longer an option due to several injuries, are excluded for those of you who can ride your bike till the cows come home, and block my bus or Metro train, well, guess what? that's crap."

Greg can no longer ride a bike because of injuries sustained while...riding a bike. When I asked him who was at fault, he dodged the question. Now that he can't ride a bike, he's become a zealous advocate of public transportation. Political narcissism anyone?

But the fact the bike people get EVERY SINGLE THING THEY WANT, and transit riders get kicked in the teeth at the state and local level, and the pass that all gets from the bike pros is kinda stupid. Choose-up-siderism serves no one. We can all get along if we all pay attention and we all realize we live in a very dense, very small city.

So long as people like me, for whom riding a bike for every single thing is no longer an option due to several injuries, are excluded for those of you who can ride your bike till the cows come home, and block my bus or Metro train, well, guess what? that's crap.

What's really crap is that it's an even/or. And that cranks who live in rent controlled apartments and so on can get lawyers to spend my tax dollars on litigation, instead of mediation.

Sucks all around!!!

That came to mind the moment I hit "Post Your Comment" ...

Perl offers up a richer regex engine than sed, but so much can be accomplished with bash, awk and sed that the proficiency with the command line really puts gui interfaces to shame.

What's with this hyper defensive culture where suggesting refinement is tantamount to attacking?

-marc

$echo "Anderson's still kind of an asshole" | perl -i -ple 's/kind of //'

$echo "Anderson's still kind of an asshole" | sed 's/kind of //'

-marc

Give me creative anarchy over destructive chaos!

That said, 2d Street Bike Lane needs work and the street probably nees its own mid range planning process to deal with how it negotiates the upcoming undergrounding of rail to the TBT so that the commercial killer that is subway excavation does not ruin yet another functional corridor as BART did Mission and mid-market.

-marc

"Criminal" Mass needs to be stopped, too, before a cyclist mob kills a pedestrian or impedes an ambulance, and thus, a huge lawsuit is filed against the city (taxpayers).

Criminal Mass does more to prompt concerns against a bicycle advocacy efforts than anything. If this anarchist-led event was stopped once and for all, I suspect bicylists groups in the city would have a less dangerous, blantantly entitled (you pay for my biking to work) reputation.

Don't fool yourself that in politics, intent translates into effect.

Anderson is dangerous to cyclists in that the delay has caused injury and possible death. But the group think of SFBC sycophants is even more dangerous, first because they claim to speak for cyclists, and second because they were the ones who tried to take a legal short cut and have yet to admit that their approach was flawed to the extent that they bear prime responsibility for the four year delay.

@murphstahoe, why load perl, which is a heavy executable?

$ echo "Anderson's still kind of an asshole" | sed 's/kind of//'

-marc

#/usr/bin/perl

s/kind of//;

Whatever... as a non-bicyclist I find a lot of the machismo posturing of some hard-core bicyclists obnoxious too but that doesn't mean I mistake those folk for the community at large or reflexively oppose any attempts to make this city more bicycle friendly...

The city shouldn't have put itself in the situation where such a suit would be successful - that's the take home message from this whole debacle. But even though he might be 'right' in a technical sense, Anderson's still kind of an asshole.