[Carfreeliving] SPUR and Transportation Reform

[Andrew Sullivan]

OK, so where are you going to find the money, Mr. Stick-It-To-Downtown?  
  THIS fiscal year?  Grandstanding is nice and all, but the bills have  
to be paid.  And I for one do NOT want the service cuts that would be  
required to close the budget gap without the extra revenue.

By the way, if you had been paying attention, you might have seen that  
Rescue Muni was advocating for higher parking fees and fines to avoid  
deferred maintenance and additional service cuts.  This advocacy needs  
to continue now that the budget is at the Board of Supervisors.   
Supervisor Peskin has made noises about opposing higher parking fines -  
which would be disastrous for Muni if the board were to go that way.   
Wildly unrealistic claims that somehow the budget can magically be  
brought into balance with no service cuts OR fare increases do not help  
things, though they seem to be getting Richard Marquez some ink.  (And  
TWU, which is very oddly opposing more revenue to pay its members.)

Andrew

On Mar 1, 2005, at 11:00, Steve Jones wrote:

> I know. And you also don't work for Muni, Newsom, or the Chamber, but  
> you always seem to end up on their side.
>
> Steven T. Jones
> City Editor
> San Francisco Bay Guardian
> (415) 487-2552
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:andrew at sulli.org]
> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:52 AM
> To: Steve Jones
> Cc: carfreeliving at livablecity.org; Joshua Hart
> Subject: Re: [Carfreeliving] SPUR and Transportation Reform
>
>
> I don't work for SPUR.
> On Mar 1, 2005, at 10:43, Steve Jones wrote:
>
>> No, that you're flaking for downtown.
>>
>> Steven T. Jones
>> City Editor
>> San Francisco Bay Guardian
>> (415) 487-2552
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:andrew at sulli.org]
>> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:43 AM
>> To: Steve Jones
>> Cc: carfreeliving at livablecity.org; Joshua Hart
>> Subject: Re: [Carfreeliving] SPUR and Transportation Reform
>>
>>
>> That SPUR can do math?
>>
>> On Mar 1, 2005, at 10:42, Steve Jones wrote:
>>
>>> Why am I not surprised?
>>>
>>> Steven T. Jones
>>> City Editor
>>> San Francisco Bay Guardian
>>> (415) 487-2552
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Andrew Sullivan [mailto:andrew at sulli.org]
>>> Sent: Tuesday, March 01, 2005 10:34 AM
>>> To: Joshua Hart
>>> Cc: carfreeliving at livablecity.org
>>> Subject: Re: [Carfreeliving] SPUR and Transportation Reform
>>>
>>>
>>> I think SPUR was just being realistic about the budget.  They support
>>> alternative revenue sources for Muni (as does Rescue Muni, as do most
>>> other alt-transportation types) but they also understood that with a
>>> $57 million deficit there's no realistic way to make up the  
>>> difference
>>> without a fare hike this fiscal year.  Longer term revenue sources
>>> like
>>> sales tax, parking tax, downtown assessment, vehicle environmental
>>> impact fee, and congestion charging will NOT be implemented in time  
>>> to
>>> address this year's deficit, and there's no extra money in the  
>>> General
>>> Fund.
>>>
>>> Andrew
>>>
>>> On Mar 1, 2005, at 10:29, Joshua Hart wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Dave and all-
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for setting up this valuable list.   I have a question to
>>>> pose-
>>>>  It seems like the San Francisco Planning and Urban Research
>>>> Association  has consistently been on the pro-car, pro-development,
>>>> pro- downtown business, pro-wealth side of many issues lately.
>>>> Their
>>>> lonely stand in support of widening MLK in GG Park, and in support  
>>>> of
>>>> yesterday's Muni fare increase clearly illustrates this bias.
>>>>
>>>> My question is- has SPUR always supported these policies?  How have
>>>> other pro-environment, pro-ped/ bike/ transit organizations dealt
>>>> with
>>>> this? (did SPUR's transportation committee actually vote to support  
>>>> a
>>>> Muni fare hike?)
>>>>
>>>> Just wondering,
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Josh
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Jim Chappell, president of the nonprofit think tank San Francisco
>>>> Planning and Urban Research Association, said Muni's three-pronged
>>>> budget was fair and should lead to more efficient transit service.
>>>>
>>>>  "The social and economic health of San Francisco depends on a  
>>>> strong
>>>> Muni, '' he said. "Your proposed budget has everyone sharing the
>>>> pain.
>>>> That is correct."
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> |       __o       		SF BICYCLE COALITION                ___        
>>>> __0
>>>>         |
>>>> |     _`\<,_          		    Promoting the Bike
>>>> |___|    _ \<,_         |
>>>> |    (*)/ (*)       		for Everyday Transport
>>>> (*)+---(*)/ (*)         |
>>>> |										                                    |
>>>> |   1095 Market St. #215 SF 94103  415.431.BIKE  www.sfbike.org
>>>>    |
>>>> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>>>> Joshua Hart Program Director 415-431-2453 ext. 23  joshua at sfbike.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 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
>>>
>>
>