Skip to content

Recent Comments



    Yes, I think that even cyclists should understand that it helps their case if they are seen to be contributing something, and agreeing to some baseline level of reasonable regulation, scrutiny and liability.



    Less? Yes. None? No.

    And everyone benefits from the emphasis of investing for vehicular use of roads, including those who don’t drive.



    Drivers do bear the greater burden. The question here is whether they should bear all of the burden, while other classes of road users bear none of the incremental burden.



    What you seem to be saying there is that the Capital Corridor train only has sustainable ridership on a fairly limited segment of its entire route. If that is the case then Jeffrey’s point that major investment is not warranted seems apt, at least outside the well-used segment.

    I’d agree that there are some cheap fixes that could probably reduce the risk on casual incursions onto the right of way.

    My point about cyclists was that, a few weeks ago, when 2 cyclists were killed in SF on the same day, there was far more expressions of outrage and dismay, than was the case here, and I am not clear why. Nothing gratuitous at all – I am just asking why the empathetic differential.



    Drivers cause far more wear and tear to roads than bikes, and should therefore bear the greater burden in paying for maintenance costs.



    What you’re not factoring in is that bicycle infrastructure costs significantly less than auto infra. So someone who rarely/doesn’t drive (even without so-called “user fees”) ends up subsidizing facilities that she doesn’t use – more than the other way around.


    Elias Zamaria

    To whom it may concern: the link to Streetsblog writing about San Jose and Guerrero in 2009 is broken. I think it is supposed to point to



    I’m a skeptic in general when it comes to police reports. I ask questions. And yes, the article says what the SFPD says. It doesn’t say how they concluded that the driver was experiencing a medical issue, which takes me back to my question: what are the SFPD’s sources for claiming the driver was suffering a medical issue – is it a doctor’s documented diagnosis, the driver’s self-reporting, or third party eye witnesses?



    I don’t know. Do you think it’s okay for a car to enter an intersection on a yellow light?



    Agreed. The fact that cyclists don’t pay any road-related taxes undercuts their argument that bicycles should be taken seriously as a transportation alternative. Even if they contributed a token amount that was raised from the sale of bicycles and bicycle-related equipment, it would give them skin in the game. As it is, they give the impression of freeloaders.



    As a regular rider on the Capitol Corridor, it’s my observation that most commuters on the Capitol Corridor get on and off the train in Emeryville, Berkeley and Richmond; so the fact that there were 30 passengers on the train during commute hours on the stretch of track between Oakland and San Jose is not particularly significant.

    What Union Pacific needs to do is fence off the track and put up surveillance cameras on the ROW, that will alert UP police that there is an intruder.

    Your gratuitous swipe at cyclists was uncalled for. If they had been struck because they were trespassing on the ROW or ignoring signals, they would have been as liable as a pedestrian or motorist.



    The plural of “anecdote” is not data. The Capitol Corridor’s ontime performance for June 2016, the most recent month for which data was available was 96.2% For the last 12 months it was 94.4%



    Of course. And there is no amount of infrastructure change, with all the attendant delays, congestion and confusion that they typically cause, that can immunize a person against their own carelessness and stupidity.



    The article said that there were just 30 passengers on the entire train, and that is during commuter hours as well.

    So yes, it’s hard to see the economic argument for major new investment, as you say. But surely something could be done to make these crossing safer. And it’s not even like these trains travel that quickly.

    Or were these suicides? Neither victim has been identified. If that has been two cyclists killed, this place would be in a state of uncontainable outrage.


    Jeffrey Baker

    I just started riding Capitol Corridor to work this week, so far it’s been seriously delayed 25% of the time :-/ I doubt that there’s anything that can be done to fix up the crossing at 98th and Railroad, which is already gated. The only fix is grade separation but there’s no economic argument to be made for what would surely cost tens of millions of dollars.


    SF Tour Driverguide

    That’s true. But can you admit that pedestrians share some responsibility for their own safety and obeying walk lights is part of that? Is it okay to start to cross when the counter is at 1 about to go yellow? If pedestrians obeyed the laws, drivers would be less frustrated and safety would improve.



    Truly embarassing. Kopp’s stamp is on some pretty important public projects so I used to naively hold him in regard, a more detailed historical reflection is showing him to be a problem maker, not a problem solver.



    Yes, there is something ethically disturbing about how somebody’s tragedy is hijacked to further an ideological agenda.



    The statement that cyclists don’t contribute towards the roads has a very clear meaning. What it means that a cyclist does not pay any ADDITIONAL costs to use a road, over and above what we all contribute in general taxes. But a vehicle driver pays those general taxes too AND has to pay special vehicle fees and taxes as well.

    That’s hardly a difficult concept to understand. The idea here is modest – that cyclists pay a small contribution to confer parity with other road users, And that there is some kind of licensing and registration requirements.



    I never said they weren’t in favor of SOME social spending. I said that the voters are not in favor of unlimited amounts of it, and that it is not unusual for tax and bond measures to fail



    Same goes for every point you agree with as well, but I on;y see you picking up on that when it’s a fact you disagree with.

    And not everything that is true is cited on the internet, you know.



    Murph, how is your grand boycott strategy working out for you?

    And you complaining that someone else won’t change their mind is highly entertaining. You’ve never admitted to ever changing your mind, even when you’ve been proven 100% wrong



    You are correct that pay is set by supply and demand. but whenever Muni offers new jobs they are inundated with applicants. That should tell a supply-sider like yourself that the pay is better than elsewhere



    I didn’t change the point. I made two different points.

    1) Muni pay and benefits should be set based on replacement value.

    2) Any worker should be paid by value and not be need



    Flatlander, a simple question for you. Should pay be set according to the economic value you add or by what you need to pay your bills, obligations and debts?

    Put another way, why should I pay you more just because your expenses go up?


    citrate reiterator

    And I mean, it’s not like private sector companies offer cost of living bumps out of the goodness of their hearts, they offer them because otherwise they’d have trouble filling those positions and limiting turnover.


    citrate reiterator

    Who said SF voters indiscriminately approve extra taxes? I said most SF voters are in favor of some amount of social spending.


    citrate reiterator

    You can’t just claim something is substantiated. You gotta show some receipts.



    There are more people traveling by bus than car in this corridor.



    That Examiner letter on bike licensing recycles the same old misunderstandings. I was surprised to see it was written by Quentin Kopp. Shouldn’t a former state legislator and current judge be informed on the facts? He’s under the belief that gas taxes paid for our roads and that bicyclists contribute nothing. It would be understandable for a lay person to hold those misbeliefs but not a public employee who can influence policy and who’s responsible to know right from wrong.



    You really don’t understand the relationship between cost of living and salaries, huh? It has nothing to do with individual choices like “buying a bigger house” and everything to do with how extremely high cost of living and ample other job opportunities affect the labor market at large.



    Dude – he doesn’t want to convince you and he won’t be convinced. He wins every time you reply, he loses if you don’t.


    Donovan Lacy

    1st you argue that Muni pay and benefits should be based on what private sector bus operators get in the same location, and when I show you that is exactly what is occurring you change the argument to Cost of Living adjustments.

    Cost of Living adjustments based on where one lives is common practice in the private sector, particularly in places like New York and San Francisco.



    We all know where this is headed. Banning all cars except for busses and taxi’s in the financial district. They’ve already done it to Market St. and have begun the process on Mission St.


    Donovan Lacy

    Sounds familiar.



    I think it’s reasonable to point out the negative impact of these street fairs, given that the article talks only about how allegedly great they are.

    Not everyone likes these street fairs.



    Funny how you still respond to many of my posts considering your claim to not see them.



    The matching funds only require a contribution at the time. The great benefit of a DC plan is that there is no future unfunded liability.

    I never said I am libertarian or part of a majority. I simply challenged the statement that SF voters indiscriminately approve extra taxes. They don’t.



    And yet the only substantiated “facts” that you challenge are the ones you just happen to personally disagree with.



    Your big assumption there is that, because SF is a more expensive place to live, we have to pay drivers more.

    Pay should be set based on value added and not on the cost of living. You don’t get a raise just because you have a kid or buy a bugger house.



    I was referring to roymeo’s rationalization and mischaracterization, and not the original article..



    The statement is in the article. Do you have any reason to believe the article author is wrong?



    All SB – SF has to do is post the magic words “traffic camera” or “red light camera” and one will appear.



    if pedestrians continue to casually cross because the politics is on their side, they will continue to get hit.

    Nope – that’s not how it works.

    The more honest way to phrase that sentence would be “If drivers continue to make turns before checking for pedestrians, they will continue to injure and kill pedestrians.”



    The biggest issue is the concentration of homeless. Remember there are two sets of homeless – the kind which are extremely visible and the kind which are invisible. Many of the extremely visible kinds are mentally ill, while invisible homeless, primarily women and children but also including some men, are likely to be living in their car or somewhere by themselves or in small groups, rather than the large dozen or more pods.

    If you could give licenses to homeless people to camp places, similar to what Santa Barbara did in giving car campers a safe place to stay, that could work, since we know that there isn’t enough homeless shelter space. But they have to take their medication, get treatment, work (even in a menial city-funded job like picking up trash or painting over graffiti), keep their area clean, and not sexually harass or threaten those that come near. If they don’t, then they will be rousted periodically to make sure that they are working towards self sufficiency. Or they can choose to go to the shadows.




    SF Tour Driverguide

    Drivers are frustrated because pedestrians almost completely ignore the walk/dont walk counting signals. To many walkers it’s fine to start crossing when the timer is between 1 and yellow while drivers wait and only one or two cars can make a right turn. It’s great to advocate for safer street design but if pedestrians continue to casually cross because the politics is on their side, they will continue to get hit.


    citrate reiterator

    “That’s a *fact*, okay? I *heard* that somewhere.” — Sarah Silverman


    Donovan Lacy

    Every time I hear “war on cars”, I can’t help bu think of this: