Insurance and registration alone would pay for at least one bus pass. Each parking ticket is a month’s bus pass. Maintainance of clunker and gas, oil changes, at least one annual bus pass. Replacement of said clunker, annual bus pass.

It’s really a false economy. Our economy rewards greatly those who can spot false economies, because you are competing with so many who can’t.

What we need is to have Muni be made free when parking is free, or better yet, make Muni free on Sunday and charge for metered parking and see how many folks opt to take the bus instead of driving and paying for parking. We need to have low-income advocates on our side when Muni raises fares and cuts services again- which seems inevitable, so working with them on addressing their concerns, as Fran notes, seems like a good idea.

What will we get in return for providing more money to MUNI? Their change machines are perpetually broken. Some of the bill changers are nearly 50 years old. MUNI does piss-poor job of managing their current funding, and any more money we provide will just go down the toilet.

The nice thing about the bike ride is I never have to worry about traffic making the trip take twice as long or more. Biking always takes about the same amount of time.

Totally agree about biking. If I bike the 5 miles to work I can do it in 25 minutes, and that’s not pushing too hard or running any lights. Driving takes a minimum of 15 minutes, if there’s no traffic, which is rarely the case. Plus, my route bike route is far less direct than the driving route, as I have to go around some hills, and prefer to avoid highly trafficked roads if possible.

“If I were working at Starbucks instead of a high tech firm, I would not work at a Starbucks in Santa Clara”

That is exactly my point, there are very few cases where somebody HAS to drive long distances for a low paying job in the bay area.

***************************************************

Most amusing question: “Can each you show us your MUNI pass?”
Best alternate response “I don’t have my wallet with me but I just bought a Smart Car.”

Meters were discussed – I don’t believe anyone was in favor of the proposal as written. Ideas discussed included allowing for longer than one hour parking and having meters that take credit cards. Scott Weiner noted the impact the current proposal would have on those who clean office buildings at night (primarily low paid immigrants). Rafael Mandelman said if increasing parking fees meant being able to increase MUNI service he’d consider it. Several people were in favor of an annual car tax rather than more nickel and diming people but apparently that’s not possible. Rebecca Prozan noted that she would be representing car owners and has to be sensitive to their needs to. Laura Spanjian thought more people should buy Smart Cars.

No mention of Google and Apple and other company) buses, but there was a fair bit of discussion on the sanctuary issue.

If it doesn’t involve a steep hill, biking is probably faster. I guarantee I can beat a car from Noe Valley to either Caltrain station by more than 5 minutes, based on daily evidence of passing dozens of cars on 24th, Valencia, 18th, Cesar Chavez, etc… let alone Market.

“Third, yes, there are a very small percentage of poor who live in SF and work outside and have to drive very far”.

I dunno, maybe it’s just me. I “go” very far to my job – with a bike and Caltrain. I wouldn’t do it except that it is a high paying job. If I were working at Starbucks instead of a high tech firm, I would not work at a Starbucks in Santa Clara. A vast majority of people are this way – low paying jobs are everywhere. It’s not one size fits all, certainly, but while government should in fact protect people from the tyranny of the majority, this is not one of the cases that need be applied. YMMV.

Reducing the number of cars via car sharing will allow those who must have a car to park them more easily. Does anyone know if the city would allow street space to be used for car sharing?

Second, if somebody lives in the Mission they have easy access to BART, which serves 4 counties, so that example is misleading at best.

Third, yes, there are a very small percentage of poor who live in SF and work outside and have to drive very far, only the tiny portion of that tiny group would be affected by extended parking meters: the poor who work far away from any transit and live in an area that has commercial parking used by residents after 6, but even then, they can feed the meeter, so there is no reason they would have to get tickets and be towed. Yes, it would cost that tiny group of people money, but there’s no tickets or towing.

Finally, the poor take MUNI in far greater numbers and a far greater percentage than the affluent, so far more people would be hurt by the service cuts and fare hikes that would ensue if parking were not raised to market rates.

Why should wealthy people’s parking be subsidized at the expensive of the working poor?

By the way, I’ve had my car towed too due to not being able to afford to pay tickets. But I’m not going to blame it on other people. I know I couldn’t afford my car, and I didn’t need it. I made choices and then had to pay the repercussions of my choices.

Check out this video! Three guys on Xtracycles towing a truck. Seriously.

http://everydayadventurers.com/2009/10/tow-truckin/?utm_source=Xtracycle+Newsletter&utm_campaign=9d8d44b51a-Tow_Truckin_Video_Events10_22_2009&utm_medium=email&mc_cid=9d8d44b51a&mc_eid=733b58dc49

The prime reason for Muni’s unreliability is congestion caused mainly by cars. The less of them clog the streets, the more reliable Muni will get. And you completely gloss over the fact that car ownership is a huge burden on most people. Yes, sure, some may need a car. But it is well documented that car ownership is an emotional, sentimental issue for many people. It’s not that people can’t imagine driving less – it’s that they don’t want to.

pretty much all of your arguments are massive exaggerations.

Yes, there are situations where a 5 minute drive equates to a 40 minute bus ride, but that pretty much is only the case for non-downtown directed rides, and it’s pretty rare that you don’t have an option for the destination. Example the closest grocery store might be inconvenient by bus, but there’s probably another one a little farther that’s much more convenient.

There’s not many poor people who live in SF & work in the peninsula, most of those types of commuters are affluent. Even if there were lots of poor living in SF and working in the peninsula, that has no bearing on parking prices in SF, you can still take MUNI, walk or bike to your SF destination.

Although MUNI has it’s issues, it’s not that unreliable. In two years of busing every day to work I was only late twice due to the bus. Plus, a responsible person in your Borders situation would leave a little earlier after their second late to make sure it doesn’t happen again until the 6 month time period was over.

Finally, yes for some people it is their choice to live and work in such places that mean they absolutely have to have a car, but that is a choice they made, and the rest of the city should not be forced to cater to them because of that choice.

For that matter, what about workers who live in the city and work in the peninsula? Even if MUNI worked perfectly every time (it doesn’t), you’ve still got lousy service to contend with on the peninsula.

In good weather, a bike can work well in many situations. In lousy weather, not so much.

Then think about how unpredictable delays are on MUNI. Most entry level workers aren’t afforded the ability to work from home, or even to have a boss who’ll understand being late because of the bus (Borders, for instance, will fire you for being more than 5 minutes late after three instances in six months). In many ways being able to depend on MUNI is a luxury.