Today’s Headlines

  • BART Board Votes to Fire GM Dorothy Dugger, Then Rescinds Vote (SF Gate)
  • Legislators’ Wrecked SUVs Cost Taxpayers Hundreds of Thousands (Matier&Ross)
  • State Sen. Mark Leno Introduces Vehicle License Fee Legislation (Bay Citizen)
  • SF Examiner: “Transit Workers’ Benefits at Premium as Service Cuts Continue”
  • Examiner Reporter Will Reisman Takes on the 30-Stockton
  • “Storm of Factors” Cause Muni to Miss Its On-Time Performance Mark (SF Examiner)
  • SF Planning Commission Approves Park Merced Development on 4-3 Vote (SF Gate)
  • ABC7 I-Team Uncovers Allegations of Corruption in SFMTA Parking Garage Contracts
  • Sit/Lie on Hold as SFPD Works on Enforcement Plan (SF Gate)
  • 85-year-old SJ Woman Dies in Car Crash Injuries; “Originally Deemed ‘Minor Collision'” (Merc)
  • Novato Police Officer Injured by Passing Driver While Making a Traffic Stop (Marin IJ)

More headlines at Streetsblog Capitol Hill

  • icarus12

    I thought this comment about Mark Leno’s proposal to raise the Vehicle License Fee (at the Bay Citizen) made sense.

    From voltairesmistress:

    It would be helpful to know how much more, on average, a revised, 2% Vehicle License Fee would cost the individual car owner in San Francisco. The $44 million figure offered by one official seems to translate into about $100 more per year per owner in the City. I say $100, because there are nearly 440,000 cars registered in San Francisco. (440,000 x $100 = $44 million)

    A higher annual fee like this needs to be part of more rational funding for the transit system and streets. Currently, the SFMTA takes in about $100 million in parking meter fees, and $100 million in parking tickets. (It takes in lots of money too from a %20 tax on private parking spaces in commercial garages.) While the meters are expensive, they are still affordable and provide turn-over for merchants and fellow motorists. But everybody knows that parking tickets are the cash cow of the system, with the typical ticket costing 25x the cost of an hour of metered parking. Tickets are very hard to avoid even for conscientious parkers. Most people get at least a couple of them a year.

    I would be more supportive of steady taxes and fees, such as the raised VLF, if such measures were accompanied by a reform of the SFMTA’s fee and citation policy. The current system of “gotcha” with exorbitant fines for minor, 2-minute violations or the absent-minded leaving of a car in a street-cleaning sweep, merely angers motorists. It makes citizens who drive unlikely to support the SFMTA’s larger and important goals.

    I say, until the SFMTA is reformed to work with drivers instead of plucking them like hapless chickens, you won’t see San Francisco’s 440,000 voting motorists support this raised VLF.

  • From the Examiner article:

    “before passengers bombard the help desk with frantic phone calls, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency officials want riders to know most delays are unavoidable and are related to each line’s traffic conditions, stop frequency and ridership patterns. Basically, they argue, the reliability of each line depends a lot on where it is and what the traffic is like.”

    If only the voters had the foresight to empower one agency to manage streets, traffic and transit so that they could manage traffic and relocate stops, then we would have one organization to hold accountable! Oh wait…

    But lately it does seem like the Examiner should get some credit for devoting a lot more front-page space to transit issues than any other publication in the city, and being one of the few publications advocating for riders. Brilliant actually testing out the theory that it’s faster to walk than take Muni in many parts of the city!

  • Tomorrow that guy should race MUNI with a bike….

  • @John,

    I gave up on the 30/45 a long time ago, the bike kicks its ass. I can get from Stockton/Columbus to Caltrain on a bike in the time it takes the bus to get from Stockton/Columbus to Market. And that’s at 6:30 am and pre-CS construction. It’s not even that close now.

  • Interesting post from NYT yesterday:

    Ed Glaeser talks about his new book “Triumph of the City: How Our Greatest Invention Makes Us Richer, Smarter, Greener, Healthier, and Happier.”

    Talks about the need to stop subsidizing suburbs, and the need for cities to keep increasing density to keep housing affordable:

    “Cities like New York and San Francisco thrive because they’re productive and fun, attracting millions of people over the years with the promise of one of the great urban gifts: upward mobility. But increasingly, they’ve become unaffordable to the ordinary people that drive their innovations. If a city has plenty of brilliant people, then give them space to live and work. Don’t enact byzantine zoning codes or hand vast, architecturally undistinguished neighborhoods over to preservationists. There is no repealing the laws of supply and demand, and if successful cities don’t build they become expensive, boutique cities that are inaccessible to mere mortals.”

  • GoGregorio

    Back when I lived in North Beach 3 years ago, I routinely beat the 30/45 downtown by foot. I rarely raced it during commute hours, though, so I don’t know if it makes a difference. In fact, I often got off at Union Square and walked to Powell Station, because it was much faster. If he keeps at it, I’d imagine he’d beat it more days than not.