[Carfreeliving] T-shirts

[Wesley Kirkman]

I like "My bike can beat up your car"
Not sure what petrol-heads will feel about it.
I always wanted a shirt that said: "Play nice. I don't have 2-ton armor"
Thought it would be too much to be read by drivers while biking/walking.
wes

On 8/27/05, Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org <
Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org> wrote:
> 
> Send Carfreeliving mailing list submissions to
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> 
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org
> 
> You can reach the person managing the list at
> Carfreeliving-owner at livablecity.org
> 
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of Carfreeliving digest..."
> 
> 
> Today's Topics:
> 
> 1. RE: [SFBike] tube times index (Dave Snyder)
> 2. TLC t-shirt ideas (Dave Snyder)
> 3. Paying it forward? (Tom Radulovich)
> 4. RE: TLC t-shirt ideas (Brinkman, Cheryl)
> 5. RE: TLC t-shirt ideas (Joshua Switzky)
> 
> 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> 
> Message: 1
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:51:17 -0400
> From: Dave Snyder <dave at livablecity.org>
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] RE: [SFBike] tube times index
> To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Message-ID: <p06230904bf35151aa7f6@[192.168.1.125 <http://192.168.1.125>]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> 
> Hi Deb and everyone,
> 
> Thanks, Deb, for explaining the strategy that the MCBC pursued to get
> such money. The reason for my post was exactly to elicit that kind of
> response: I want San Francisco bicycle advocates to realize how low
> we've set our sights, and to compare our success to yours makes it
> easy to see.
> 
> Yes, the competitive side in me bristles when I hear you say "make
> Marin the model" because that's what we set out to do for SF in 2000,
> when the DPT got funding to do a bicycle network plan (the one that's
> almost ready to be considered by the MTA Board.) But that doesn't
> mean there's any hatin' going on because you've been successful.
> We're just jealous! Isn't it obvious?
> 
> For the benefit of sfbike readers, our story is this: We were missing
> funding opportunities back then because we didn't have a backlog of
> plans, or a reliable cost estimate for our projects or the bike
> network. The current bike network plan did cost estimates for a
> subset of projects and mostly small projects. What we still have to
> do is what you indicate in part 3 of your strategy below -- "think in
> terms of the overall cost for building a complete network (this shows
> the vision)."
> 
> Nobody official has been asked to do this analysis, so it hasn't been
> done. We still don't know what a complete bicycle network would look
> like, and how much it would cost! It was my expectation that the
> recent bike plan would answer this question and disappointment that
> it didn't that fueled so much of my frustration, and frankly, anger,
> that I expressed in disrespectful ways for which I still have to
> apologize.
> 
> With your success to compare ourselves to, the new leadership at MTA
> Planning, the continued strength of the SFBC, and the growing
> dissatisfaction with the status quo, I have more hope than
> frustration that we can develop a consensus that the bicycle network
> should be considered a single capital project (as such, it's highly
> cost-effective compared to even the much-awaited Geary BRT project),
> planned as such, costed, and built with five to ten years. As Peter
> Tannen has agreed, it takes just as much time to apply for one $25
> million grant to "complete the bicycle network" as it does to apply
> for a $50,000 grant to paint one block of bike lanes. Maybe even
> less! It's time we stepped back just a moment from our incessant
> focus on the top 20 projects -- the trees -- and take a good look at
> the forest. It's a beautiful thing!
> 
> Please don't interpret my jealousy as hatin', aright? I think we can
> make SF the model for a dense urban city as much as Marin can be the
> model for a suburban county. We can find similar amounts of money
> from local and regional sources. And together, in cooperation with
> the other groups and the Bay Area Bicycle Coalition and the MTC, make
> the Bay Area the model for a metropolitan area!
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> At 5:17 PM +0200 8/25/05, debhub at igc.org wrote:
> >Hi everyone,
> >
> >This analysis of expenditures on bike/ped infrastructure in SF and
> >Marin is interesting. However, to be more fully accurate (in terms
> >of the use and cost of facilities), we would need to include
> >recreational bicycle trips (which are not included in the MTC data).
> >As you are aware, there are many, many cyclists from throughout the
> >Bay Area and the world who come to Marin to do cycling touring and
> >riding on the weekends. This will largely boost the numbers of
> >users in Marin County.
> >
> >I hope that we can look at this analysis in terms of "a rising tide
> >can lift all boats." The funding coming to Marin County for bicycle
> >facilities is a "rising tide", and I hope that the fact that we are
> >receiving funds, from a variety of sources, will help SF advocates
> >to similarly convince the City to step up its investment in bike
> >facilities. SFBC is very successful, and I'm sure that you can
> >devise ways to get further investment from the City in bike
> >infrastructure.
> >
> >It was Dave Snyder, former ED of the SFBC who inspired me in 1998 to
> >become the founding Executive Director of the Marin County Bicycle
> >Coalition (I recently shifted gears to be Advocacy Director of MCBC,
> >starting in March 2005 so that I can also focus on national level
> >policies). I learned many of our advocacy techniques through Dave
> >and other advocates from around the nation. MCBC also worked with
> >other advocates in Marin County such as Patrick Seidler, from
> >Transportation Alternatives from Marin, to decide what to focus on,
> >and when. We took somewhat of a different focus -- of "following
> >the money." Some of our strategies for getting funding have been:
> >
> >1. To be involved in all large transportation planning projects so
> >that cycling can get a slide of the pie. (This is where the large
> >majority of our bike/ped funding is coming from).
> >2. To envision that large scale ticket items, like opening tunnels
> >along the planned North-South Greenway, are possible -- and to go
> >for the funding. (This has helped because we have shown a "need.")
> >3. To think it terms of the overall cost for building a complete
> >network (this shows the vision).
> >4. To use international examples for what is possible, and to
> >create an opportunity for "pilot programs" in the United States,
> >with the intention of creating successes that can then be expanded
> >nationwide.
> >
> >By thinking this way, the funding we have secured has come from many
> >places, some unlikely.
> >
> >* Regional Measure 2 ($15.5 million for bike/ped) the March 2004
> >ballot measure was planned to decrease traffic in the nexus of
> >bridges. Marin County was planning to submit a project for redoing
> >the Greenbrae Interchange. We proposed that they expand the
> >definition of the interchange to include the parallel North-South
> >Greenway components, the Cal Park Hill Tunnel and the Central Marin
> >Ferry Connection Project. As a result, the Initial Project Study
> >reports (from 2004 and 2005) show $15.5 million in investment for
> >these two bike/ped projects!
> >
> >* Transportation Sales Tax, Measure A ($10 million over 5 years):
> >This was passed by Marin voters in November 2004. I went to seven
> >years of meetings to ensure that this ballot measure would be
> >drafted properly. As a result we received:
> > - 11% for Safe Routes to School (which is $6 million over the
> >next five years, $2 million for infrastructure)
> > - A segment of the North-South Greenway parallel to the Highway
> >widening ($8 million)
> > - A policy for all roads to consider the needs of bicyclists and
> >pedestrians
> >
> >* Non-Motorized Transportation Pilot Program ($25 million): This
> >did not come easily or by accident. Patrick Seidler and I proposed
> >this concept based on techniques used in Europe, and wrote a white
> >paper on Safe Routes to School and infrastructure Pilot Programs in
> >January of 2000 (see www.marinbike.org <http://www.marinbike.org> for 
> details). Congress saw
> >that Marin County knew how to make pilot programs suceed. Marin
> >received the Safe Routes to School pilot in August 2000, and worked
> >hard to make it a success. One of our deliverables was creating a
> >Toolkit to describe to others how to implement a program. This was
> >published by NHSTA and over 20,000 copies have been distributed --
> >it's also available on the web. This helped to spread the SR2S
> >concept throughout the USA, and our stats helped to lead to the $612
> >million in the federal bill for a new national program. It is our
> >aim to work with the three other Nonmotorized Pilot Programs that
> >were selected to also make this pilot a success, leading to
> >important statistical data that can create cost effectiveness for
> >building a complete bike/ped network. Then, in the next
> >reauthorization, hopefully we can get something like the Intra-State
> >Bikeway Act, as we'll show that bicycling is the most cost effective
> >means of transport.
> >
> >* Other Bike/Ped funding ($10 million): There is an additional $10
> >million in other bike/ped funding that has already been received
> >(and planning for installation is taking place now), or the Marin
> >will receive through formula allocations (TDA, TFCA, etc).
> >
> >In addition to these secured funds, we have worked since 1999 to
> >influence the SMART (Sonoma Marin Area Rail Transit) plan. Because
> >of our early influence in the plan, they have a goal for a bike/ped
> >pathway parallel to the rail for the entire length of the corridor
> >(75 miles, with 25 in Marin and 50 in Sonoma). We worked to
> >influence the expenditure plan that will go to voters in November
> >2006, and this currently includes $40 million for the pathway.
> >
> >I hope that we can continue to all work together! For example, I've
> >been helping with the West Span strategies since 1998, as I feel
> >that a shore-to-shore facility on the Bay Bridge will be extremely
> >important for the entire region.
> >
> >Please don't hate us in Marin because we've been successful! Let's
> >make the whole Bay Area a model. We can do it!
> >
> >Thanks for listening.
> >
> >Deb Hubsmith, Advocacy Director
> >Marin County Bicycle Coalition
> >
> >P.S. I'm writing from The University of Delft in The Netherlands,
> >where more than 50% of all trips are made by bike. I'm at the
> >Childstreet conference, and then am going on a tour of various
> >facilities with Patrick Seidler and a full group that he is bringing
> >here through his non-profit Transportation Alternatives for Marin,
> >including a County Supervisor, planner, and community leaders.
> >
> >P.P.S. If the previous messages were forwarded to a larger group
> >(including the SFBC bike list, please send my response message so
> >that everyone can get the expanded view.)
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >-----Original Message-----
> >From: Dave Snyder <dave at livablecity.org>
> >Sent: Aug 24, 2005 1:32 AM
> >To: doug at rhaa.com, 'A P Thornley' <apt at thornley.com>
> >Cc: sfbike at topica.com, Deb Hubsmith <deb at marinbike.org>
> >Subject: RE: [SFBike] tube timex index
> >
> >Provocative, moi?
> >
> >Yes, those Census numbers are off, for several reasons. One, they ask
> >"how did you get to work last week?" in the early spring, when
> >cycling rates are lower. Second, multimodal trips, i.e., biking to
> >Caltrain, are counted only as a single mode, the longest, which is
> >almost never the bike segment. Third, as the Census undercounts poor
> >people and people living in unusual housing arrangements (I,
> >personally, was not counted until I ran into a volunteer on the
> >street, because my cottage house was hard to find), it also
> >undercounts bicyclists. The SFBC and other surveys consistently find
> >higher bicycle commute numbers than the Census, in the range of 2.5
> >to 5.5 percent according to SF phone surveys.
> >
> >Finally, the Census only counts work trips, which account for only a
> >third of all trips. Non-work trips, including recreational trips,
> >surely have a higher bike use rate than work trips. For all these
> >reasons, the SFBC's estimate of 3-4% of all trips being made by bike
> >is accurate, and I hope people don't assume those Census numbers are
> >the final word on bicycle mode split. However, they do make for an
> >accurate comparison between Marin and San Francisco, as they use the
> >same methodology, and therefore result in the same provocative
> >insight.
> >
> >Deb Hubsmith, being the effective advocate that she is, uses numbers
> >much more favorable to Marin bicycle advocacy: the MTC Household
> >Transportation Survey (which counts all trips, not just work trips,
> >but has a higher margin of error, but as we saw, the Census
> >methodology creates a larger margin of error on this issue than a
> >purely statistical analysis would indicate). To be fair, let's
> >compare the numbers using Deb's data, and see how provocative it is.
> >
> >Marin to Marin, 1.76% * 247,289 population = 4,352 = $13,787 per rider
> >SF to SF, 2.30% * 776,733 population = 17,864 = $560 per rider
> >
> >13787:560 = 24.6:1
> >
> >Please note, these are ten years' worth of dollars per today's rider,
> >which is not the same as a measure of cost effectiveness, because the
> >true denominator is the number of future riders after the investments
> >are made.
> >
> >
> >At 3:07 PM -0700 8/23/05, Douglas Nelson wrote:
> >>I know that this is supposed to be provacative, but clearly the U.S. 
> Census
> >>numbers are way off.
> >>
> >>Doug.
> >>
> >>-----Original Message-----
> >>From: Dave Snyder [mailto:dave at livablecity.org]
> > >Sent: Monday, August 22, 2005 1:04 PM
> > >
> >>
> >>Amount of money San Francisco is planning to spend on bicycle
> >>planning, education, and facilities in the next five years: $10
> >>million **
> >>
> >>Amount Marin County is planning to spend in the next five years: $60
> >>million ***
> >>
> >>Number of residents who bicycle to work in San Francisco: 8,302 *
> >>
> >>In Marin: 1,233 *
> >>
> >>Ratio of expenditures per cyclist in Marin to San Francisco: 40.5 to 1
> >>
> >>*U.S. Census
> >>**SF County Transportation Authority
> > >***MCBC's Advocacy Director Deb Hubsmith
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 2
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 17:10:30 -0400
> From: Dave Snyder <dave at livablecity.org>
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt ideas
> To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Message-ID: <p0623090fbf353419ebe1@[192.168.1.125 <http://192.168.1.125>]>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" ; format="flowed"
> 
> We're about to launch a membership program here at TLC --
> announcement coming some time in September. One of the tried-and-true
> benefits of membership is of course the t-shirt. We have a great
> logo, the question is the slogan. We need your help with ideas!
> While we still have some work to do on messaging, our projected niche
> in the movement is in support of car-free living. Below is a list
> from an earlier brainstorm to get you started. Share your idea with
> the whole list!
> 
> - Legalize Jaywalking.
> - Eco-urbanist.
> - Keep Your Cars Off My Body.
> - Streets are for People.
> - Streets Belong to Everybody.
> - Demand your Right to the City.
> - Multimodalist.
> - Cars Kill. Does Yours?
> - Kill Your Car (Before It Kills You).
> - Jesus [Buddha/Mohammed] was a Pedestrian.
> - Free Parking is Not a Right.
> - My Bike Can Beat Up Your Car.
> - I Bike [Walk/Take Transit] and I Vote.
> - I Am Traffic (Calming).
> - Your Car Smells Funny.
> - We're Here, We're Car-Free, Get Used to It.
> - These Boots Were Made for Walking
> - Parking Cars is for Suckers (from Repo Man)]
> - I lost 3,500 pounds. Ask me how.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 3
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 14:33:26 -0700
> From: Tom Radulovich <tomrad at well.com>
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] Paying it forward?
> To: Carfree Living <Carfreeliving at livablecity.org>
> Message-ID: <01B0A692-7DC5-44FF-8CFE-E7222B50CC2A at well.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
> 
> Well said, Dave!
> 
> One of the problems we have with the implementation of Prop. K is
> that the TA wants to dole out the funds for programs at the rate of
> one-thirtieth of the total program amount each year for thirty years.
> But for those programs that create networks, in particular the bike
> program and the transit-preferential streets program, it seems that
> there is a much greater public benefit in having the networks all at
> once rather than in increments over the next three decades. And if
> completion of these networks would effect a sizable modal shift away
> from autos, it would make economic sense as well, as the cost of
> borrowing money to complete these networks quickly could be saved
> from reduced Muni operating costs, reduced road maintenance costs,
> reduced congestion, environmental and public health costs, fewer
> accidents, etc.
> 
> Earlier this year we asked Muni to think a little more strategically
> about their budgets, and in particular develop budget scenarios which
> model what the system's prospects would be if they pursued transit-
> priority and stop-consolidation measures more aggressively, and were
> more proactive about raising revenues through more rigorous parking
> management and fines and fees. They could then compare a 'transit
> priority' scenario with the 'business as usual' scenario, which would
> help them make their case for the transit priority measures they are
> asking for, as well as tell supervisors who want to save bus stops
> "fine, you can keep that stop, just go out and raise us the
> additional xxx million dollars it takes to continue stopping there
> for the next 30 years". I think SPUR's transportation committee is
> working on a paper that looks at what increases in ridership and
> revenue and reductions in operating costs Muni would realize from a
> rationalizing stop spacing and route spacing and establishing transit
> priority.
> 
> The same case should be made for the bike network; if spending
> $800,000 in the next two years to plan the complete and delightful
> bike network, and, say, $50 million over the following three years to
> implement it, that we could achieve our goal of 10% of all trips on
> bikes by 2010, which would eliminate xxx million vehicle trips per
> year, which would create a savings of $xxx per year going forward,
> which is more than enough to cover the cost of issuing bonds for the
> $50 million.
> 
> --Tom
> 
> On Aug 26, 2005, at 12:19 AM, Dave Snyder wrote:
> 
> 
> > Car-free people,
> >
> > I personally think that given all the obstacles -- democratic
> > process, bureaucratic hoops, and the funding process --- that Mike
> > and Oliver and Peter and Deirdre and Nick etc. are doing a great
> > job and being pretty damned expedient. I know for a fact sometimes
> > some of them work until 11 pm to meet a deadline. Most bureaucrats
> > don't do that. The problem is not the staff's efforts or abilities,
> > it's the vision and context in which they operate.
> >
> > What would happen if we got the right group of people together to
> > try to change the context, to agree on points 1 and 2 below:
> >
> > 1. What we want: a complete and delightful bike network, 75% built
> > in five years, 95% in ten years. And built to a very high standard:
> > every section of street with a clearly delineated space for bikes,
> > smooth pavement, preferential traffic light treatment, attention to
> > detail for beauty and convenience, and a degree of safety such that
> > in surveys 80% of people of all ages and genders and ethnic groups
> > say, "yes, I think I am safe from cars when I use my bike in San
> > Francisco." Let's remove the "it's not safe" excuse from most
> > people's reasons for not biking.
> >
> > 2. Considering that at the current pace and with current funding,
> > it will take 50 years to get that, what kinds of changes to the
> > system -- the democratic process, bureaucratic hoops, and the
> > funding process -- do we have to make to accomplish this goal, or
> > how can we manipulate that system differently?
> >
> > Now that we have the updated Bicycle Plan Policy Framework in
> > place, and the set of improvements in the "network improvement
> > document" are rolling along--and I do believe that we can count on
> > that set of improvements to be done in the next five years--it's
> > time to start a new planning process. We need to plan the bicycle
> > network in its entirety, develop the high standards to which it
> > will adhere, and propose an answer to #2 above so that we can
> > accomplish #1. Without such a process, backed by that vision, the
> > adopted plan's goal of accommodating 10% of all trips by bicycle by
> > 2010 is a pipe dream.
> >
> > I've thought about this question a great deal: to do it right, with
> > planners and engineers, heavy GIS-based analysis and outreach, and
> > outreach professionals, it would cost about $800,000 over two
> > years. We could do it for less, but $800K is not a lot for a
> > planning process. That's about how much we spent on the one we just
> > completed, which provides the foundation for this one I'm proposing.
> >
> > It's timely that this conversation is happening on the car-free
> > list at the same time that Deb Hubsmith and I have been having a
> > heated exchange on the sfbike list about the recent windfalls for
> > Marin, which is spending $60 million in the next five years
> > compared to our $10 million, even though we have three times the
> > population and roughly twice the bicycling rate. It's a wake-up
> > call for San Francisco bicycle advocates.
> >
> > In a separate post I'll share that email in which Deb explains what
> > the Marin County Bicycle Coalition did differently than the SFBC
> > that has resulted in such greater success, so far.
> >
> > Dave
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list to facilitate and
> > promote car-free living in SF
> > To unsubscribe: mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?
> > subject=unsubscribe
> > or, for all options, go to:
> > http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> >
> >
> >
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 4
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:24:19 -0700
> From: "Brinkman, Cheryl" <Cheryl.Brinkman at McKesson.com>
> Subject: RE: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt ideas
> To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Message-ID:
> <20E4599A6B5FD2488C70EF2DFA0B03960C8D7E15 at ddce0053.mckesson.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain
> 
> -Car free and happy
> 
> -I'm on a Car free diet
> 
> -A human gets 20 miles per gallon of beer.
> 
> -Car free and loving it
> 
> 
> 
> cheryl
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Snyder [mailto:dave at livablecity.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 2:11 PM
> To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt ideas
> 
> We're about to launch a membership program here at TLC --
> announcement coming some time in September. One of the tried-and-true
> benefits of membership is of course the t-shirt. We have a great
> logo, the question is the slogan. We need your help with ideas!
> While we still have some work to do on messaging, our projected niche
> in the movement is in support of car-free living. Below is a list
> from an earlier brainstorm to get you started. Share your idea with
> the whole list!
> 
> - Legalize Jaywalking.
> - Eco-urbanist.
> - Keep Your Cars Off My Body.
> - Streets are for People.
> - Streets Belong to Everybody.
> - Demand your Right to the City.
> - Multimodalist.
> - Cars Kill. Does Yours?
> - Kill Your Car (Before It Kills You).
> - Jesus [Buddha/Mohammed] was a Pedestrian.
> - Free Parking is Not a Right.
> - My Bike Can Beat Up Your Car.
> - I Bike [Walk/Take Transit] and I Vote.
> - I Am Traffic (Calming).
> - Your Car Smells Funny.
> - We're Here, We're Car-Free, Get Used to It.
> - These Boots Were Made for Walking
> - Parking Cars is for Suckers (from Repo Man)]
> - I lost 3,500 pounds. Ask me how.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe:
> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> Message: 5
> Date: Fri, 26 Aug 2005 16:54:35 -0700
> From: Joshua Switzky <Joshua.Switzky at sfgov.org>
> Subject: RE: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt ideas
> To: "Brinkman, Cheryl" <Cheryl.Brinkman at McKesson.com>
> Cc: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org,
> Carfreeliving-bounces at livablecity.org
> Message-ID:
> <OFCAF74876.E021742B-ON88257069.008139F2-88257069.0083575E at sfgov.org>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I like cheryl's ideas. I prefer the "happy" side of car-free-ness as
> opposed to telling people they and their cars are awful killers. That's 
> not
> a t-shirt I'd want to wear a lot. A slogan should be assertive, yet
> cheerful, clever, and/or humorous. Along those lines, I like the very last
> one on dave's list: "I lost 3,500 pounds. Ask me how (I got rid of my
> car)."
> 
> This is a bit too much for a t-shirt, but how about an publicity campaign,
> or at least a page on the website and a brochure, on the opportunity costs
> of owning a car. Like this:
> What I would have spent on owning a car this year: $8,000
> What I'll do with my $8,000 this year:
> New laptop computer $1,500
> 1 week trip to Paris $1,500
> Lift tickets for 10 days skiing in Tahoe $500
> Ten dinners at fancy restaurants $500
> New camping gear $500
> 1 week trip to Hawaii $750
> New bicycle I've wanted $1,250
> 12 months Muni passes, BART tickets, taxi rides, car rentals $1,500
> 
> 
> 
> -j
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> "Brinkman,
> Cheryl"
> <Cheryl.Brinkman@ To
> McKesson.com> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Sent by: cc
> Carfreeliving-bou
> nces at livablecity. Subject
> org RE: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt
> ideas
> 
> 08/26/2005 04:24
> PM
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -Car free and happy
> 
> -I'm on a Car free diet
> 
> -A human gets 20 miles per gallon of beer.
> 
> -Car free and loving it
> 
> 
> 
> cheryl
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dave Snyder [mailto:dave at livablecity.org]
> Sent: Friday, August 26, 2005 2:11 PM
> To: Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> Subject: [Carfreeliving] TLC t-shirt ideas
> 
> We're about to launch a membership program here at TLC --
> announcement coming some time in September. One of the tried-and-true
> benefits of membership is of course the t-shirt. We have a great
> logo, the question is the slogan. We need your help with ideas!
> While we still have some work to do on messaging, our projected niche
> in the movement is in support of car-free living. Below is a list
> from an earlier brainstorm to get you started. Share your idea with
> the whole list!
> 
> - Legalize Jaywalking.
> - Eco-urbanist.
> - Keep Your Cars Off My Body.
> - Streets are for People.
> - Streets Belong to Everybody.
> - Demand your Right to the City.
> - Multimodalist.
> - Cars Kill. Does Yours?
> - Kill Your Car (Before It Kills You).
> - Jesus [Buddha/Mohammed] was a Pedestrian.
> - Free Parking is Not a Right.
> - My Bike Can Beat Up Your Car.
> - I Bike [Walk/Take Transit] and I Vote.
> - I Am Traffic (Calming).
> - Your Car Smells Funny.
> - We're Here, We're Car-Free, Get Used to It.
> - These Boots Were Made for Walking
> - Parking Cars is for Suckers (from Repo Man)]
> - I lost 3,500 pounds. Ask me how.
> 
> Dave
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe:
> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org mailing list
> to facilitate and promote car-free living in SF
> To unsubscribe:
> mailto:Carfreeliving-request at livablecity.org?subject=unsubscribe
> or, for all options, go to:
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ------------------------------
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Carfreeliving mailing list
> Carfreeliving at livablecity.org
> http://livablecity.org/mailman/listinfo/carfreeliving_livablecity.org
> 
> 
> End of Carfreeliving Digest, Vol 7, Issue 16
> ********************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: /pipermail/carfreeliving_livablecity.org/attachments/20050827/303f5bb2/attachment.htm