ENUF

ENUF has joined the non-partisan backlash against government overreach that is fighting privatization and commercialization of public streets and  properties all over the country.
We have caught the media’s attention as we abandon former party alliances to protect our civil liberties.
We are starting by pushing back at the excesses and lack of accountability of the SFMTA and supporting the No on A and B (No more Muni money for non-Muni projects) and Yes on L (Restore transportation balance) campaigns.

The history of the movement: Eastern Neighborhoods United Front (ENUF) was born out of concerns over plans to install thousands of parking meters in the North Eastern Neighborhoods. When signs popped up announcing that parking meters were going to to installed all over Potrero Hill, Dogpatch and the Mission District, hundreds of angry citizens showed up at City Hall to protest. Residents and merchants complained about meters in front of their homes and businesses with no notice, discussion or input on their part. Neighborhood groups filed an appeal and the next day the SFMTA withdraw their plans.

Citizens organized a public meeting which was widely attended by Supervisors, SFMTA staff the media, and hundreds of irate residents. Things did not go well for the SFMTA at that meeting and they backtracked from their original plans. At this point they had a foe that was ready to strike back.

Stop SFMTA: ENUF started a petition to Stop SFMTA which put more pressure on the city authorities and gave drivers and car owners a means to direct their anger and personal stories to the city authorities.

Uniting the neighborhoods: SFMTA attempted to divide and conquer by going after one street at a time, but ENUF united all neighborhood residents and merchants and together we were able to convince the Supervisors to limit the expansion of the parking meters in the city, using the one means possible of controlling the SFMTA. They amended the parking meter contract to limit the number of meters purchased. Recently SFMTA gave up enforcement of the Sunday parking meters as well.

Restore Transportation Balance: ENUF has been credited with starting the fight but now the anger has boiled over to the point that political forces have gathered to place the Restore Transportation Balance initiative on the November ballot. Passage of this ballot, which only requires a 51% vote to pass, will send a strong message to the SFMTA that their days are numbered if they don’t change course. http://www.restorebalance14.org/

contact@sfenuf.net with your suggestions and concerns
Facebook:  https://www.facebook.com/SFENUF
Twitter:  https://twitter.com/#!/sf_enuf

Recent Posts

Parking-First “Save Polk Street” Crowd Attacks Van Ness BRT

by : sf.streetsblog – excerpt

“Save Polk Street” has aimed its parking-first agenda at Van Ness Bus Rapid Transit. A couple dozen speakers protested the project an SFMTA hearing last week, distributing fearmongering flyers [PDF] claiming that removing some parking and banning left turns would “kill small businesses,” back up car traffic, and make the street more dangerous.

The long-delayed Van Ness BRT project was already approved two years ago by the boards of the SFMTA and the SF County Transportation Authority. Last week’s hearing was on specific street changes [PDF], like removing parking for station platforms and pedestrian bulb-outs. No action was taken by the hearing officers, but the street changes are expected to go to the SFMTA Board of Directors for approval in October…

Save Polk Street, a group of car-obsessed merchants, successfully watered down plans for protected bike lanes on Polk in favor of preserving parking. The group has ignored statistics – like SFMTA studies showing that 85 percent of people arrive on Polk without a car, or a count of 4,300 parking spaces within a block of Polk between Union and McAllister Streets. Only 1,900 of those parking spaces are on-street, and on-street spaces along Polk and Van Ness make up a fraction of the total.

Most of the complaints about Van Ness BRT were about removing parking and banning left turns, and claimed that transit doesn’t need the estimated 30 percent speed increase. Some also complained about removing five of 16 bus stops to streamline the route…

The changes at the hearing are expected to be approved at an SFMTA Board hearing on October 7.

Why the Van Ness BRT is bad flyer:
http://sf.streetsblog.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/vannessflier1.jpg

We shall see in November who is the minority when the voters decide whether to continue funding SFMTA projects or stop them from further traffic disruptions, such as the Van Ness BRT, by voting Yes on L: http://www.restorebalance14.org/

 

 

Stop the Van Ness BRT. Let your city, state and federal representatives know that you oppose any changes on Van Ness. “Van Ness (and Lombard) are considered part of the Federal and State highway system. They are designated as 101 because they form the official link where 101 ends to where it resumes at the GG Bridge.”

 

  1. Palo Alto inks $500K deal to loosen traffic gridlock, explores parking fixes Leave a reply
  2. VTA celebrates final funding amount toward BART Silicon Valley Extension Leave a reply
  3. Insurance Bill For Uber/Lyft Drivers Passes California Senate Leave a reply
  4. Uber’s Secret Agents: When Poaching Becomes Unethical Leave a reply
  5. Uber and Lyft Have Become Indistinguishable Commodities Leave a reply
  6. Local: In The Mission In The Mission – Local News, Information, Events and Photos Harassment on MUNI and BART? Oh Yes Leave a reply
  7. Paul McCartney Fans Stuck in Traffic Start Petition to Get Refund for Missed Show Leave a reply
  8. Safety on Top of Safety: The City Rips Out a Pedestrian Upgrade to Install a Pedestrian Upgrade Leave a reply
  9. San Francisco Labor Council Endorses James Fang for re-election to BART Board Leave a reply