Why traffic laws are not being enforced

Comments from a concerned citizen

The city outgrew the infrastructure and LOS (level of service) some time ago. There are too few police, firemen, Muni drivers, teachers, 911 emergency call center operators, etc. for the current level of population. Not only do we have more people living in San Francisco, the population swells during the day making it impossible for the traffic control officers to do a proper job. To make matters more difficult, City Hall dedicates huge amounts of money to planning for future growth instead of fixing the problems we have today. SFMTA can’t hire and train enough operators but they did manage to push their PR department from 4 employees to 55 to try to convince you that you should be happy with “their service”. Are you?

Keeping police officers on the streets is one aspect of the development policy that the CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) was supposed to take into consideration, and did until recently. Now they just create a record that shows they took CEQA into consideration and found that they could do nothing to mitigate the “harm” that might come from the new project under consideration and approve it anyway. You may thank your state government and the courts for overriding the local government laws and policies and protections our residents voted for to keep a healthy balance between growth and services. Now we just have forced growth.

If you are paying attention to local Planning Commission hearings you have heard residents and local neighborhood organizations warning about the lack of infrastructure growth to support the increased population. Instead of taking these concerns into consideration, our state representatives have rewritten laws to avoid slowing growth to match LOS (the level for service needed to serve the community.)

In the next few days you will see a number of street actions that are an attempt to bring this unbalanced growth to the attention of the public and an attempt to suggest a better plan going forward to return the city to a more pleasant standard of living. You will also see some new faces running for office that offer a different narrative.

If you don’t like the way things are, you might consider making some changes when you can.

SF D5 supervisor candidates split on transit issues

By Matthew S. Bajko : bear – excerpt

The two leading candidates in San Francisco’s heated contest for the District 5 supervisor seat both are vocal critics of the city’s mass transit system and its less-than-stellar service in the Haight, Cole Valley, and Fillmore neighborhoods.

In separate editorial board meetings with the Bay Area Reporter this month, both Supervisor Vallie Brown and tenants rights activist Dean Preston told of waiting at Muni stops and being unable to board either a cramped bus or packed N-Judah subway car headed toward downtown. They both related how their fellow stranded passengers resorted to taking private transit options instead…(more)

District 10 Supervisor Candidates Respond to View’s Questions

Sara Bloomberg : potreroview – excerpt

The View asked the five candidates running for the District 10 Board of Supervisors seat this November the six questions listed below.  Their responses were only lightly edited, mostly for typos. Candidates appear in reverse alphabetical order.

1. The Transportation and Road Improvement bond, Measure A, would allocate $500 million to improve Muni, bicycle and street infrastructure, and pedestrian safety. Do you support this measure?  If it passes in November what would be your funding priorities for District 10? Please identify specific examples.

2. Measure E, “The Soda Tax,” would impose a levy of two cents per ounce on sugar-sweetened drinks sold in San Francisco. Revenue from the tax would fund programs to improve food access, physical fitness, health and nutrition. Bayview-Hunters Point has the City’s highest concentration of diabetes-related emergency room visits, according to the proposed ordinance. Do you support this measure? Why or why not?

3. District 10’s poverty rate is upwards of 18 percent, according to 2010 Census data, compared to the City average of 11 percent. As supervisor, what specific programs and/or policies would you support to help individuals and families emerge from poverty?  Are you in favor of increasing the minimum wage?

4. Are there any specific City expenditures that you believe are wasteful?

5. Do you believe that the taxes and fees San Francisco levies on its residents and businesses are too high, or too low?  Please explain your response.

6. How would you handle the onslaught of development occurring in Dogpatch, Potrero Hill, and Showplace Square?… (more)

Potrero Hill Democratic Club: D10 Supervisorial Candidates’ Debate

youtube – excerpt – (video)

PHDC’s July 2nd debate at the Potrero Hill Neighborhood House. Shortly after the debate the club voted to endorse Tony Kelly for District 10 Supervisor.

 

BART Criticized For Not Advertising Four Openings On Its Board Of Directors

By Margie Shafer : cbslocal – excerpt

OAKLAND (KCBS)— BART is facing criticism for not publicizing that filings are now open for the transit agency’s Board of Directors. One East Bay city councilman is hoping there are interested people so incumbents don’t run unopposed.

The councilman from Orinda, Steve Glazer, speaking for himself, points out there is no notification that July 14 is the opening date for filing for three weeks for those seeking a BART board of directors’ position…

Glazer has been an outspoken critic of the ability of BART workers to strike, but has also called the board of director’s an “insider’s club”. Glazer is not seeking a board seat..

There are four board seats out of nine that are up in November’s election. In past elections a number of BART board director seats had only one candidate running for office… (more)