Skip to content

Recent Comments


    Donovan Lacy

    In the instance that you recounted, you are faulting the bicyclist for following the letter of the law. They are protesting by obeying the law.

    I will agree that the bicyclist may have acted rashly in their response to the mother trying to pick up her child, but would you also agree that the mother acted rashly as well as illegally by attempting to go around several stopped vehicles.

    You are able to empathize with the frustrate mother who is breaking the law but unwilling to empathize with the cyclists who are frustrated by what they believe is a selective enforcement of the stop sign law.



    spare me Mr “THINK OF THE CHILDREN! The THUGZ!”



    Amazing how we remembers the one cyclist of two who have killed anybody in a decade (longer?) but I bet he can’t name a single one of the motorists who have killed approximately 200+ pedestrians and bicyclists in that time. About as biased (confirmation bias) as they come ….


    The Colonel

    “So when they don’t stop at stop signs – they are threats, because they are breaking the law?”

    No, I would think the law exists to minimize the threat of injury that can result when cyclists don’t follow the traffic laws.

    When did you adopt this strategy of building false syllogisms premised on obviously incorrect assumptions? It’s like you’re a Professor of Logic at Fox News University or something. QEDFOX.


    Donovan Lacy


    You have your own Godwin’s law, but instead of Nazis you bring Chris Bucherre in just about every discussion. We can call it the Jimbo Rule.

    I assume that you would be okay with putting every motorist in jail for life that kills someone while texting, changing the radio station or are otherwise distracted?



    “so it will be informative to see how the authorities handle this one”

    I’m pretty sure we won’t here anything about how they handled this, since bicyclists don’t matter to the cops … unless they are rolling stop signs in which case they are a huge threat to everyone’s safety, enough so to warrant a “crackdown” from SFPD.



    So when they don’t stop at stop signs – they are threats, because they are breaking the law? Breaking the law = threat, must be stopped.

    “She was just trying to pick up her kid before school” – you say? What I believe you said was she “tried to go around the stopped cyclists”. Which is illegal – otherwise known as a threat. Presumably Capt John Sanford cited her for this anti-social behavior



    chris bucherre went through a solid red, as many witnesses testified



    and he was racing to play his little video game. should be in prison for life


    Andy Chow

    In the cases of SamTrans and Golden Gate Transit, these routes use city streets to access downtown SF. AC Transit already access downtown SF directly from the bridge.

    If AC Transit were to serve 4th & King, it would also extend beyond 4th & King since there’s no layover space there. That might be UCSF Mission Bay, SF General, or other destinations with large employment.

    If that route isn’t going to serve Transbay, where should it go with either sufficient ridership to 4th & King and beyond, and/or provide connection to other AC routes?

    Golden Gate Transit provides limited service along Geary but ridership is mediocre compared to the bulk of the service along Van Ness or Financial District. Transfer to other routes is available at the GGB toll plaza.


    Jym Dyer

    @Karen Lynn Allen – When I first moved to Noe Valley, I noticed the same thing, the basic excuse being the hilly terrain. I actually called the police after nearly being hit, and they refused to take a report unless I was hit. Then when I was hit, I called and they refused to take a report unless I’d been sent to the hospital (which would mean it was too late).

    That was years ago. As I read in a Streetsblog story 5 days ago, Sean Rea started sending complaints of real incidents (recorded on his Contour videocamera) to Park Station and Captain Sanford dismissed them by saying, “It appears that you have already made your mind up.”

    So it seems the complaint-driven enforcement priorities only count if your complaint is about bicycles.



    I saw that. Thanks for following up. He stopped short of proposing any legislation or coming out in support for the Idaho stop, but it is good to have his support in this matter.


    Jym Dyer


    Karen Lynn Allen

    As a pedestrian, on a daily basis I notice that 9 out of 10 drivers in Noe Valley at four-way stops do not come to a complete stop if no other cars are present. 1 out of 10 do not stop even if a pedestrian is actively crossing. (This morning I observed even SFMTA meter maids whizzing through stop signs on Sanchez Street at 10+ mph.)

    I don’t have a problem with drivers rolling through stops at 2 mph, except for the fact that cars have blindspots and drivers often fail to see pedestrians and bicyclists even at this speed. It’s even more dangerous when drivers roll through stop signs and then punch their accelerators oblivious to all non-car street users.

    However, as a bicyclist, I think bicyclists need to claim their share of responsibility. Slowing down and yielding at stop signs for bicyclists emphatically does NOT mean whizzing through intersections at speeds over 7 mph. It means slowing down. It does not mean swooping through an intersection making all the other bicyclists, drivers, and pedestrians who got there first wait for you. It means yielding. It does not mean zooming past pedestrians with inches to spare, startling them, just because you’re pretty sure you’re in control enough not to hit them. It means being considerate and doing your part to make bicycling work in San Francisco.

    Ticketing bicyclists for low speed yielding is idiotic, a waste of both our tax dollars and limited police resources. However, anyone who bikes like they are the only person in the world who matters should be landed with a fat ticket.



    Best wishes to the cyclist for a full recovery!
    Per Twitter updates, it seems likely that the cyclist was heading east on a green (fresh green, perhaps?) and collided with the SUV heading south on Octavia towards the freeway. So, if the SUV entered the intersection on a yellow (not stale yellow, but yellow- yellow) and the cyclist entered when the light turned green and collided with the SUV, it will likely be ruled to be the cyclists’ fault, as the SUV had entered the intersection legally and had the right of way (referred to as ‘possession of the intersection’). Now remember that the Strava-racing dude went through a yellow lighted intersection when he hit the elderly male pedestrian on Market and Castro a few years ago (and the pedestrian started crossing before he had the green light, per reports I’ve read), so it will be informative to see how the authorities handle this one. Not expecting much action in favor of the cyclist, sadly, except maybe more enforcement of cyclists’ behavior in the name of Vision Zero.


    The Colonel

    That’s not what I said, or what I believe. When bikers stop at stop signs and stoplights, they are not threats at all. They’re doing what they’re supposed to be doing under the law, and both the SFPD and those of us who live along the Wiggle greatly appreciate it.

    What made the cyclists threatening in the situation I reference above is that they were acting in a thuggish, threatening manner, surrounding this poor woman’s car and terrifying her and her child. And for what? Why would they choose to treat her so poorly? She’s not the SFPD, she was just trying to pick up her kid before the school closed.

    You’re being willfully reductive. But then that’s what I always loved about you.



    OK. They stop – they are a threat. They don’t stop – they are a threat. By deduction – they are always a threat. QED


    The Colonel

    “Sounds like your story makes it clear that bicyclists are an even greater public threat than we realized.”

    At least when they’re acting like a mindless mob that disregards the lives of their fellow community members, yes.

    I must admit, it was a thrill when the SFPD officer arrived and thanked all the cyclists for obeying the law. I assume he’ll be there, tonight, too, expressing his appreciation. Maybe we can get him to join in the MOONWALK!



    Thanks for the story. Sounds like your story makes it clear that bicyclists are an even greater public threat than we realized. All the more reason we need Captain “Letter of the Law But Only When I Want to” Sanford out there to save the citizens of the Wiggle from the unruly mob that is bicyclists. After all, think of the CHILDREN!!!!



    “At Outside Lands, SFMTA Tickets Drivers Using Muni Stops and Crosswalks for Drop-Offs”

    Not that blocking Muni stops and crosswalks is ok, but I’m sure they had lots of designated loading zones somewhere with ample signage and parking enforcement staff directing people, right? Oh, no? So we’re just ticketing people for performing a commonly desired activity without coming up with a safe and legal alternative? That’s great.



    Crash Counselors, even.



    Collision Counsel?


    The Colonel

    “Sounds like you are no better than the cyclists, huh?”

    Don’t be silly. I’m not going to be blocking neighborhood traffic, or interfering with working folks’ commute home, or harassing drivers like I saw the mob doing last time*–I’m just going to be moonwalking and waving at their idiocy. Does that make be better? I’ll leave those value judgments to you.

    (*I stood and watched for a while last time, and while the bikers’ antics were childish, they didn’t really cross over into assholery until they starting attacking individual drivers. At one point, a woman with HER CHILD IN THE BACKSEAT tried to go around the stopped cyclists, and a group of them surrounded her car, hitting her hood until she backed up. The woman was being apologetic–as she repeatedly shouted, she was just trying to pick up her other child–but she was physically intimidated by the mob of upstanding SF citizens who were protesting for their right to blow through a four-way stop. This time, me and my fellow MOONWALKERS will be there to lend her a hand!)


    The Colonel

    Good to know.



    @seanrea ‘s experience is that submitting complaints about drivers is met with derision by Capt Sanford



    “While all the bikers are lined up being petulant ninnies, we’ll be moonwalking back and forth across the crosswalk.”

    Sounds like you are no better than the cyclists, huh?

    But seriously, I think this is awesome. It’s like Sunday Streets in the Wiggle but on a school night! It would be great to see all non-car modes of transit take over our streets, as it should be. I think you should organize more of these because pedestrians and bicyclist both get screwed by cars all the time, so thanks for helping join the efforts into one!



    Hoodline called, they are happy you’ve come to visit and want us to keep you. But I think you’d be better off at Bob Gunderson’s blog.


    Drew Levitt

    I was thinking about doing the same thing. Even better would be a sustained campaign of submitting complaints about unsafe driver behavior to Park District. The nice thing about Capt. Sanford’s decision to let complaints, not collision data, drive his enforcement priorities is that we can directly affect the balance of those complaints! What if, every time we bike the Wiggle, we pull over, wait for a driver to roll through a stop sign or cut off a person walking, and call in a complaint?



    Just hypothesizing: judged by the angle of the car in the 2nd photo, it looks like another illegal right turn hook.


    The Colonel

    The San Francisco Anti-Crybaby Crew is also staging a counterprotest! We’re encouraging everyone who’s tired of cyclists willfully jamming up the rest of community to join us for MOONWALK FEST at the corner of Steiner and Waller. While all the bikers are lined up being petulant ninnies, we’ll be moonwalking back and forth across the crosswalk.

    Remember your Michael Jackson gloves!!


    Jeffrey Baker

    I know many people can read for comprehension, but it might have been better if the headline, and the article, referred to the meeting as being on Tuesday, instead of “tomorrow”.



    Capt Sanford fiddles while Rome Burns.

    Bicyclist vs car accident at Octavia and Market streets in #sanfrancisco bicyclist is seriously injured.— DB (@BoyerDina) August 11, 2015



    I was mimicking Capt Sanford.



    Is there any way we can lobby for GJEL to change their name from “Accident Attorneys” to something a little more accurate? Every little bit helps – even if it means abandoning the alliteration.


    Andrew Cohen

    biking safely does not equal biking legally. I bike for a living in SF and have thousands of miles under my tires in the city with very limited incident, do I follow the law? absolutely not, its just not viable…do I respect cars and other pedestrians? absolutely….i am very frequently trying to wave cars and people in front of me in busy intersections….

    however, if they are just pulling to a stop and I am moving, me stopping and them looking to see if I stop would take longer for both of us and leech my much coveted energy. again…if it costs no one else extra time, yes I just blow through intersections, obviously I am incentivised to not hit anyone/get it bc if I get hurt I not only get hurt, but loose my lively hood. what we need is teaching people basic rules to follow, ie only passing on left, staying out of door zone, keeping a straight path, signaling etc etc….and infrastructure that make it not so life threatening. yeah yeah keep dreamin i know.. until then tho, Ill take care of myself just fine and you can leverage those tickets against my non existent license.



    Thanks for the background. Sounds like a tough problem and I appreciate the thoughtful discussion. Too often, I think we build things without thinking about (and planning for) the impacts to our transportation infrastructure, so I was glad to see some thought going into ways we might mitigate Bay Bridge problems caused by the potential TI development – *before* they occur. While I realize there are complex issues involved, I just hope that the final solution doesn’t assume the status quo – that everyone will just drive everywhere they need to go. That solution isn’t going to work for anyone.



    “SF Paratransit Selected as Paratransit System of the Year

    The SFMTA Paratransit Program was selected as Paratransit System of the Year by CalACT, the California Association for Coordinated Transportation, which is the industry association for small, rural and specialized transportation providers in California. The SFMTA was
    selected for its role as a leader in developing innovative approaches to providing services to its senior and disabled residents. SFMTA’s Paratransit Program was lauded for innovations such as the SFMTA-subsidized taxi program, allowing riders to purchase $30 worth of
    taxi value for $5.50; the Shop A Round program providing round trips to shops and markets; and its Van Gogh program, addressing social isolation
    by providing groups of seniors transportation to plays, movies, museums and other cultural events. The Accessible Services Paratransit Debit Card, which replaced paper scrip, was cited as a technological
    innovation that allows for more efficient electronic data collection and a more user-friendly customer experience. Congratulations to Kate Toran, Annette Williams and the entire team at Taxi and Accessible Services for your great work!”

    “By and large, the taxi companies have accepted the requirements of working with the city and have been great partners. We can say with assurance they consistently stand up and deliver, and it makes a huge
    difference to the program. In fact, customer satisfaction surveys consistently reflect scores in the high 90s for their level of service, reliability and overall satisfaction.”

    Do you have any reason to believe that these systems are other than what they are advertised? My friends who use it say that they are great. Some people will complain about anything, no matter how nice or cheap it is.


    Xavier Harmony

    And you’re missing the point. Police shouldn’t be targeting violations based on complaints (which are subject to biases), they should be targeting violations based on data (like the “Focus on the Five” program).



    I don’t understand how businesses and their customers would be exempt from the congestion charge. Wouldn’t the charge apply to anyone who uses the ramps?



    FYI, the contamination clean up has been ongoing for 15+yrs on TI. Every year they find something new. This year, Congress gave them another $10M for clean up.

    It’s highly likely they will never build those 8K units. Lennnar has a history of bankrupting the LLC (TICD) after building & selling the luxury units and bolts on the affordable housing portion of the project.

    The current infrastructure is decaying and people are living with black mold, raw sewage backups, and exposure to lead and asbestos. There is no way for residents to deal with JSCO’s abuses because TIDA won’t intervene and there are no grievance policies in place to elevate the problems to the city. Supervisor Jane Kim doesn’t care and routes all resident complaints back to JSCO.



    Thoughtful reply, thanks. However, your premise that businesses and their customers will pay the congestion charge is wrong. As a matter of fact, ask Rachel Hiatt at SFCTA how much businesses and tourists will pay and she will direct you to Bob Beck at TIDA. Why wouldn’t she know the answer? I believe she does but doesn’t want to say it aloud. Because the response is NOTHING.



    It seems all of those groups will be included in the congestion charge, but that won’t address the 8000 new housing units being added over the next 15 years. If all those new residents drive to work every day, that’s a lot of additional traffic on the bridge, so we need to discourage that as much as possible. I would love to see improved transit options so that driving doesn’t always seem like the most convenient option. I like @NoeValleyJim:disqus’s idea of a sliding scale fee for those people who truly need to drive and can’t afford the fee, but my guess is that for a lot of people (including many who are lower income), they drive mainly because the transit options are so abysmal, not because driving is critical to their survival. Making transit options more attractive and driving less so seems like a good way to go, especially if a sliding scale fee is available to the very small number of people who absolutely must drive for some reason.



    “That’s how it is when you’re biking on San Francisco’s car-dominated
    streets. You have to be constantly on the lookout, ready to anticipate
    unpredictable driver behavior, calculating how to minimize danger and

    And that’s the heartbreak of it all, because as bicyclists we have a right to feel good and to feel safe when we bicycle. By riding bicycles we are creating the kind of world that doesn’t have the sick stress, the danger, abuse, etc. that motor vehicles create yet almost like martyrs we suffer more, not less.

    I’m sure that some of the disgusting people in authority will never understand that.

    I read an interesting description about how karma actually works. The basic idea is that when you do something, it is like giving a gift to others. For example, by not eating animal products, one gives the gift of happiness and peace to other beings, of not having to fear for their life and experience the suffering and misery of their friends and relatives being killed and enslaved.

    There are many in positions of authority who are simply not skilled at giving gifts and actually cause more suffering in the world.

    But I encourage everyone to remember, during those times when it seems like too much, to remember that what you are doing is monumental and is benefiting many beings. By choosing to bicycle instead of riding in a motor vehicle, you are becoming creators of amazing worlds of peace and wholesomeness.



    The biggest part of the problem here is that nobody really has language to describe the actual problem. In terminology terms,I like “Scofflaw”.

    When I watch four cyclists blatantly cut off a police car in the middle of a Wiggle intersection, it *seems* that significant percentage of bicyclists simply have no conception of “right of way” and “don’t break laws ten feet away from the cops, you stupid moron”. These people are scofflaws, and if we want a civilized society, they either need to behave or be stomped out of existence.

    We can debate about the merits of the “Idaho Stop” and proper defensive cyclist behavior. But, if there is a Black & White Ford sitting there and you rolled through and got a ticket? Thats solely because you are irresponsible dumbass, and you had it coming. If you aren’t looking for Crown Victorias, what is the real likelihood you’re paying attention to pedestrians or anything else?


    Lee Ross

    Chief Suhr put this Guy in charge of the Park Station. All these concerns are really being directed to the wrong person. Sanford is just a functionary sent out to Park Station to carry out policies put in place by Chief Suhr’s team. The Chief likes the media spotlight. Shine it on him.



    Really? I would have thought a ferry to SF from Treasure Island at rush hour would be faster than driving….

    Oh – I see, you are comparing the current transit to driving, not the transit proposed to be coupled with the congestion pricing. Jeez, that’s not even clever.



    You don’t understand, clearly your mind is made up. We get a lot of actual complaints about cyclists.


    Amy Farah Weiss

    If you care about the issue of SFPD’s crackdown on bikes, your vote for Mayor this November matters!

    As an official Mayoral candidate of San Francisco, I support a “Yield for Safety” bike policy that would first be piloted (with evaluation) on the Wiggle. I would ask the SF Bike Coalition, Walk SF, and other Vision Zero transit safety advocacy groups to join the SFPD in developing a discretion training program for police officers and a “yield for safety” program for cyclists. Cyclists who in any way show reckless or endangering behavior to pedestrians, drivers, or other cyclists would be ticketed. The spirit of the law is to support safety and flow for all, and I have interviewed many SFPD officers about this matter who have told me that they are legally allowed to use discretion in ticketing.

    I produced this video via Neighbors Developing Divisadero in 2012 in support of increasing safety and flow on the Wiggle with the help of the Wigg Party:

    Let me know if you’d like to help me campaign on this issue. And remember, this November you can link arms with the social equity advocates, policy strategists, and culture makers who have joined forces to challenge the status quo
    of current leadership. Use ranked-choice voting and vote 1, 2, 3 to replace Ed Lee: Vote for me (Amy), Francisco, and Stuart in whatever order feels right for you. Check out my website and get involved at



    I spent 30 mins at at a 4-way stop in Sanford’s district earlier today and recorded 86 traffic violations by drivers, mostly incomplete stops. I’ll be bringing these “complaints” to the meeting tomorrow. If Sanford wants to conduct stings based on complaints (his declared rationale for the bike crackdown), then 86 complaints about drivers should be plenty, right? I’d encourage others to record your own complaints as well!


    StrixNoctis .

    To me it looks like even the police car didn’t come to a complete stop. I’ll assume Sanford was driving that car since he’s the chief & representative of his precinct.