Today’s Headlines

  • CARB Set to Adopt “Cap and Trade” Program to Curb GHGs (Mercury News, SF Gate, LA Times)
  • Chronicle Editorial Blasts SF Congestion Pricing Study While Getting Some Facts Wrong
  • Counter That With This Story from The Examiner: “Congestion Chokes San Francisco Commute”
  • Driver Crashes Into Former Virgin Megastore Building on Market Street (ABC 7)
  • Grist: “Does Urbanism Have to be Black and White?”
  • Segways Can Go Where Bikes Can’t in GG Park Because “They’re Less Dangerous.” Huh? (SF Examiner)
  • Living in the O to Appeal McDonald’s “Unfriendly Pedestrian” Redesign in Oakland
  • “Sleek White Tower” on New Bay Bridge East Span Beginning to Rise (SF Gate)
  • SMART Board Approves Purchase of New Trains; Downtown San Rafael Included (Marin IJ)
  • Bailed-Out Auto Companies Would Collapse Without Profits From Gas Guzzlers (NYT via Sblog NY)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • SMART pulling in the San Rafael and killing two stations – I like that outcome.

  • Anonymom

    SFUSD voted last night to cut the yellow school buses by 60% over three years. 3,300 kids to lose their transportation to school.

    http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/education/2010/12/school-bus-service-slashed-cost-saving-move

  • Regarding school bus cuts, San Francisco Unified should offer neighborhood schools that parents can have confidence in. Sending small children across town for their education 1)wastes their time, 2) alienates them from their community, 3)discourages parental involvement, 4) is terrible for the environment and 5) doesn’t do much for them academically. Walking or biking to school provides children with the physical stimulation first thing in the morning that is proven to help with brain activity and learning. For neighborhood schools in high poverty areas, allocate extra money in ways that best meet the needs of high poverty kids.(For example, provide every child with a free breakfast like the KIPP schools do.) In general I’d rather see money put into schools than into school buses. And I’d really like to see a lot fewer people driving their kids across town every morning, to public or private school.

  • Anonymom

    @taomom I agree with your policy objectives and reasoning behind favoring neighborhood schools. However, after 30+ years of busing there is a striking disconnect between where SFUSD owns and operates school facilities and where SF’s kids live. The 3,300 kids who rely on the yellow buses don’t have a reasonable alternative: Muni can’t pick up that service; many families don’t have access to a vehicle or have job flexibility that allows them to leave early to transport their children; and we don’t have a reliable taxi system. Imagine telling an 8 year-old (3rd grade) that they need to leave their school and friends in order to move to a (possibly underperforming) neighborhood school where they know no one. These will be painful cuts for a lot of families, mostly in the south and southeastern portions of the City.

    http://portal.sfusd.edu/data/epc/Capacity%20Surplus%20Deficits%20for%20K-5.pdf

  • Bob Davis

    The comment about US auto manufacturers uses the terms “gas guzzlers” and “gas sippers”. These terms have always bothered me, probably because they “anthropomorphosize” (if that a word) motor vehicles, turning them into cartoon characters. Don’t forget, they only “guzzle” or “sip” under the direction of a human being.