Today’s Headlines

  • More on Cap & Trade Helping to Fund New Muni Trains (SFExaminer)
  • Bus Driver Group Accuses SFMTA of Not Standing by its Employees (SFGate)
  • Supply Causing Some Moderation of Rents (SFExaminer)
  • More on Stall of Brown’s By Right Proposal (Curbed)
  • Design for Affordable Housing at Broadway and Front (Socketsite)
  • Caltrans to Blow Up Remaining Old Eastern Span Piers (SFBay)
  • BART Delays Sunday Evening from Power Failure (EastBayTimes)
  • Berkeley BART Station to Lose Rotunda (CBSLocal)
  • Neighbors Oppose Burlingame Condos Near Caltrain and Downtown (DailyJournal)
  • Join a Walk of San Francisco (SFExaminer)
  • Prettiest Street in SF (Curbed)
  • Commentary: BART Needs Billions (EastBayTimes)

Get national headlines at Streetsblog USA
Get state headlines at Streetsblog CA

  • david vartanoff

    Sure, BART needs a thorough overhaul–including personnel top to bottom. That said, BART also owes riders some better behavior; first offer riders of AC,CCTA, etc the same pass deal Muni riders get, second, a guarantee of 24/7 service within 2 years, third a limit (probably needs to be a separate referendum) on wage raises to the CPI driven COLA rate for Soc Security. And, to enforce the latter, we need a no strike law.

  • RichLL

    The “article” is actually a piece of political propaganda for the bond measure so, as you’d expect, it is biased. Its focus is 100% on getting the bond passed and 0% on any other changes that are needed.

    It’s rather disingenuous to position this bond measure as “capital improvement” because, for the most part, it is simply replacing whole chucks of their existing infrastructure that is worn out and failing. Important that may be, but calling it capital improvement is a tad grandiose given that all it really does is keep the trains running. Many people would call that maintenance money.

    You are absolutely correct that we need a no-strike provision. For all that the biased article talks about fiscal rectitude the total give-away to the BART workers and unions last time around was unforgivable and unsustainable. A pay freeze and conversion of their pension scheme to 100% employee-funded DC plan should be a given.

    I’m far less convinced about running BART 24/7 however. I think the costs would out-strip the revenues putting BART’s otherwise admirable farebox recovery ratio at risk. And it imposse greater stresses on the tracks and equipment while narrowing the window for regular maintenance.

    Finally this bond needs a 2/3 majority to pass which is a significant hurdle given that millions of voters don’t use BART. So I hope BART has a back-up plan for if the bond measure is defeated, as it may well be.

  • david vartanoff

    24/7 is a necessity for the Bay Area. As to the extra cost, the benefit to the population at large is worth it.
    As to capital improvements v normal maintenance, BART has from the get go been funded from a mix of bonds,state and federal grants,sales taxes, real estate levies so the distinction is merely a question of how to do the accounting. Farebox revenue, while greater as a percentage than say Muni or AC has never, will never cover even full operating costs let alone sufficient maintenance to achieve and sustain a State of Good Repair, nor should it. We build transit, as highway infrastructure, potable water, sewer systems, etc as a common good.

  • njudah

    lol rents have been skyrocketing for years, then they only do so slightly and it’s “moderation” lol lol lol