- Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

Re: [Transpo] No bike injuction information on City Attorney website
by Ted Strawser 22 Jul '08

22 Jul '08

Hi Matt Thank you for the information, the updated website, and, especially, the conversation yesterday. I am glad to hear that there is more behind the scenes and that the City Attorney does see the bike plan injunction as a priority. I do, also, agree that the website may not have been the best place for me to interpolate the efforts of the City Attorney. I do still believe, however, that the record of Mr. Herrera on the bike plan injunction will speak volumes to his creditials as an environmentalist as he continues his exploration of a future Mayoral candidacy. As this injunction continues to drag on, the environmental priorities of the City Attorney's office will be best judged by the strategies, resources, and creativity that is put into the bike plan injunction. If you request the court provide relief from the injunction once and recieve such relief.... the obvious question will be "why didnt you request relief a dozen times". That story would look like an office that did not do all that it could. Alternatively, if you request relief 20 times and are successful five, that would look more like an office that is working hard to make the best of a bad situation. As it stands, the City Attorney's office did not appeal the injunction and (as I understand it) hasn't spent much time infront of a judge arguing for relief on behalf of the 160,000 SF cyclists that ride a bike once a week. I am encouraged by your strong words, even as I was disappointed not to see the City Attorney attend yesterday's bike plan rally. But, still, I look forward to the months to come when the priorities and efforts that you described come to fruition. Thanks again for the good discussion Ted Strawser San Francisco ----- Original Message ---- From: Matt Dorsey <Matt.Dorsey(a)sfgov.org> To: tedstrawser(a)yahoo.com Cc: board.of.supervisors(a)sfgov.org; cityattorney(a)sfgov.org; gavin.newsom(a)sfgov.org; SF BIke <sfbike(a)lists.riseup.net>; steve(a)sfbg.com; transpo(a)sfgreens.org Sent: Monday, July 21, 2008 1:11:38 PM Subject: Re: No bike injuction information on City Attorney website We certainly understand your frustration with respect to the timeline of the court-ordered environmental review as well as with the underlying injunction, Ted, and I can assure you that City Attorney Herrera shares that frustration. In response to your email, I've uploaded a PDF of the major pleadings and orders from the case, which I am certain will demonstrate this office's considerable efforts in fighting the legal challenges to the City's Bicycle Plan. To the extent the absence of these documents left you with the mistaken impression that this matter has been anything short of a top priority, I apologize: the Web site is my responsibility, and I regret that it doesn't always reflect the hard work and priorities of this office and the public servants who work here. Our Web site is available at the following URL... http://www.sfgov.org/cityattorney/ Apart from the City Attorney's legal defense of the Bicycle Plan, this office has repeatedly petitioned the Court to narrow the scope of the injunction; for general relief for modifications necessary for public safety exigencies; and for specific modifications, including that recently approved at Fell and Masonic. If you wish to access the complete docket of the case, you may find it online at the San Francisco Superior Court Web site at the following URL... http://webaccess.sftc.org/scripts/magic94/Mgrqispi94.dll?APPNAME=IJS&PRGNAM… ...and by entering the case number: 505509. It is my understanding that a Deputy City Attorney will provide a brief status report on the legal case at this afternoon's hearing of the Board of Supervisors' Land Use and Economic Development Committee. As with any litigation to which the City is party, however, detailed discussions of litigation strategy are conducted only in closed session with the Board because of attorney-client confidentiality. I hope the documents I've made available online help inform you of some of the legal challenges we've faced and the efforts we've undertaken to address them. If you have any further questions, don't hesitate to let me know. Best, MATT DORSEY Communications Director ------------------------------------------------------------- OFFICE OF CITY ATTORNEY DENNIS HERRERA San Francisco City Hall, Room 234 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco, California 94102-4682 (415) 554-4662 Direct (415) 554-4700 Reception (415) 554-4715 Facsimile (415) 554-6770 TTY Ted Strawser <tedstrawser(a)yahoo.com> 07/21/2008 10:44 AM To cityattorney(a)sfgov.org cc SF BIke <sfbike(a)lists.riseup.net>, gavin.newsom(a)sfgov.org, board.of.supervisors(a)sfgov.org, steve(a)sfbg.com, matt.dorsey(a)sfgov.org, transpo(a)sfgreens.org Subject No bike injuction information on City Attorney website Dear Mr. Herrera Looking at the front page of your own website and searching through SF Gate, I can find zero evidence that you are spending any time at all working on the bike injuction. I originally assumed it was simply a "low priority" for you. Could it be true that, in fact, this is a "no priority". Will we see you at the rally today in front of City Hall? I would appreciate hearing from your office whether you have a plan to represent the 160,000 San Franciscans who ride their bikes in the city at least once a week. Your efforts to date, if there have been any, have been quite unacceptable (and unsuccessful by the way). Dissapointed, Ted Strawser San Francisco

1 0

No bike injuction information on City Attorney website
by Ted Strawser 21 Jul '08

21 Jul '08

Dear Mr. Herrera Looking at the front page of your own website and searching through SF Gate, I can find zero evidence that you are spending any time at all working on the bike injuction. I originally assumed it was simply a "low priority" for you. Could it be true that, in fact, this is a "no priority". Will we see you at the rally today in front of City Hall? I would appreciate hearing from your office whether you have a plan to represent the 160,000 San Franciscans who ride their bikes in the city at least once a week. Your efforts to date, if there have been any, have been quite unacceptable (and unsuccessful by the way). Dissapointed, Ted Strawser San Francisco

1 0

FYI: Ethanol pollution could be worse than gasoline
by Ann Garrison 13 Jul '08

13 Jul '08

http://www.relocalize.net/ethanol_pollution_worse_than_gasoline

1 0

Digg Story: U.S. Air Force to to fly on coal-to-liquid transpo fuel.
by Digg 09 Jul '08

09 Jul '08

so I'll just do my best with whatever time was allotted tonight 'cause I coudn't make the cc meeting. digg user anniegarrison would like to share this story with you: http://digg.com/world_news/U_S_Air_Force_to_to_fly_on_coal_to_liquid_transp… --- "U.S. Air Force to to fly on coal-to-liquid transpo fuel." Coal-based Air Force jet fuel will be more refined than the coal-based diesel that Air Force vehicles burn on the ground, but whoever's commanding the Air Force, presumably the commander-in-chief, seems convinced that an Air Force running on coal-based transpo fuel could finally persuade us, resistant consumers. Peabody Coal's big campaign $ pay. +1 people dugg this story To verify that this email was sent by Digg user anniegarrison, visit: http://digg.com/verifymail?key=3c3bbbf33d2400e6e3443561a0855a5c&OTC-em-st2 To opt out of ALL future emails from Digg, visit: http://digg.com/optout?key=7fe520eb59f913cc6db3ed6e793e03f3&OTC-em-st3 Digg will NOT store your email address, even if you opt out! Digg will store only an encrypted key, which even Digg can't decipher.

1 0

Hidden World Bank Report: Biofuels Cause 75% Rise In Food Prices
by Eric Brooks 07 Jul '08

07 Jul '08

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jul/03/biofuels.renewableenergy Secret report: biofuel caused food crisis Internal World Bank study delivers blow to plant energy drive Aditya Chakrabortty The Guardian (UK) Friday July 4, 2008 Biofuels have forced global food prices up by 75% - far more than previously estimated - according to a confidential World Bank report obtained by the Guardian. The damning unpublished assessment is based on the most detailed analysis of the crisis so far, carried out by an internationally-respected economist at global financial body. The figure emphatically contradicts the US government's claims that plant-derived fuels contribute less than 3% to food-price rises. It will add to pressure on governments in Washington and across Europe, which have turned to plant-derived fuels to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases and reduce their dependence on imported oil. Senior development sources believe the report, completed in April, has not been published to avoid embarrassing President George Bush. "It would put the World Bank in a political hot-spot with the White House," said one yesterday. The news comes at a critical point in the world's negotiations on biofuels policy. Leaders of the G8 industrialised countries meet next week in Hokkaido, Japan, where they will discuss the food crisis and come under intense lobbying from campaigners calling for a moratorium on the use of plant-derived fuels. It will also put pressure on the British government, which is due to release its own report on the impact of biofuels, the Gallagher Report. The Guardian has previously reported that the British study will state that plant fuels have played a "significant" part in pushing up food prices <http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/jun/19/climatechange.biofuels> to record levels. Although it was expected last week, the report has still not been released. "Political leaders seem intent on suppressing and ignoring the strong evidence that biofuels are a major factor in recent food price rises," said Robert Bailey, policy adviser at Oxfam. "It is imperative that we have the full picture. While politicians concentrate on keeping industry lobbies happy, people in poor countries cannot afford enough to eat." Rising food prices have pushed 100m people worldwide below the poverty line, estimates the World Bank, and have sparked riots from Bangladesh to Egypt. Government ministers here have described higher food and fuel prices as "the first real economic crisis of globalisation". President Bush has linked higher food prices to higher demand from India and China, but the leaked World Bank study disputes that: "Rapid income growth in developing countries has not led to large increases in global grain consumption and was not a major factor responsible for the large price increases." Even successive droughts in Australia, calculates the report, have had a marginal impact. Instead, it argues that the EU and US drive for biofuels has had by far the biggest impact on food supply and prices. Since April, all petrol and diesel in Britain has had to include 2.5% from biofuels. The EU has been considering raising that target to 10% by 2020, but is faced with mounting evidence that that will only push food prices higher. "Without the increase in biofuels, global wheat and maize stocks would not have declined appreciably and price increases due to other factors would have been moderate," says the report. The basket of food prices examined in the study rose by 140% between 2002 and this February. The report estimates that higher energy and fertiliser prices accounted for an increase of only 15%, while biofuels have been responsible for a 75% jump over that period. It argues that production of biofuels has distorted food markets in three main ways. First, it has diverted grain away from food for fuel, with over a third of US corn now used to produce ethanol and about half of vegetable oils in the EU going towards the production of biodiesel. Second, farmers have been encouraged to set land aside for biofuel production. Third, it has sparked financial speculation in grains, driving prices up higher. Other reviews of the food crisis looked at it over a much longer period, or have not linked these three factors, and so arrived at smaller estimates of the impact from biofuels. But the report author, Don Mitchell, is a senior economist at the Bank and has done a detailed, month-by-month analysis of the surge in food prices, which allows much closer examination of the link between biofuels and food supply. The report points out biofuels derived from sugarcane, which Brazil specializes in, have not had such a dramatic impact. Supporters of biofuels argue that they are a greener alternative to relying on oil and other fossil fuels, but even that claim has been disputed by some experts, who argue that it does not apply to US production of ethanol from plants. "It is clear that some biofuels have huge impacts on food prices," said Dr David King, the government's former chief scientific adviser, last night. "All we are doing by supporting these is subsidising higher food prices, while doing nothing to tackle climate change." ### -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

Mayor's Ballot Measure Attack On Transit Authority
by Eric Brooks 26 Jun '08

26 Jun '08

Mayor's Ballot Measure Attack On Transit Authority from http://www.beyondchron.org/articles/Budget_Cuts_Hit_Indigent_Political_Skir… ...Finally, Newsom submitted an Ordinance to change the make-up of the Transportation Authority (SFCTA) -- a body that administers $100 million a year in sales tax revenue for transportation projects. While Muni is run by a seven-member Commission entirely appointed by the Mayor (the MTA), the Board of Supervisors run the SFCTA -- which gives the legislative branch some control over the City's transportation policy. Newsom's Ordinance would kick the Supervisors off the Transportation Authority and replace them with five members: (1) the Mayor, (2) an elected official appointed by the Mayor, (3) the President of the Board of Supervisors, (4) an elected official appointed by the Board President, and (5) the City Treasurer. I asked City Treasurer Jose Cisneros at last night's Harvey Milk Club Dinner what he thought about such a proposal. Incredibly, Cisneros -- who Newsom appointed to his post in 2004 -- had not yet been told about it. by Paul Hogarth, Jun. 18, 2008 -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0

Important! Joint Transpo/Sustainability Working Group, Thu June 26, 6:30pm
by Eric Brooks 25 Jun '08

25 Jun '08

Hi all, VERY important stuff is happening on transportation, utilities and energy in San Francisco, and we really need to meet. This Thursday June 26, 6:30pm, SFGP Office Proposed Agenda 1) Imminent Muni Fare Hikes 2) Mayor's Ballot Measure Removing Board of Supes Oversight Of Transit 3) Nov Ballot Measure For 100% Green Public Power! 4) PREPARING FOR AUGUST APPOINTMENTS TO THE SFPUC 5) Peak Oil Report? (Jeanne) 6) Water Report? (Mato Ska) 7) Quick Update On Community Choice & Power Plants -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

4 6

Fuel costs push mayors to push mass transit.
by Ann Garrison 23 Jun '08

23 Jun '08

Same reason all "our" jet aircraft, including the Blue Angles, are slated to fly on coal-based diesel by 2011. http://tinyurl.com/3eq4o5

1 0

New Report: Must -Reduce- CO2 To Avoid Catastrophe
by Eric Brooks 07 Jun '08

07 Jun '08

Hi all, New data that I had guessed would emerge, finally has. James Hansen of NASA (who was the first to broadly alert the world to the accelerating greenhouse effect) and many other scientists, have now released a report that gives a much more urgent warning on the global carbon/climate crisis than previous releases; especially by comparison to the very weak reports that emerged from from the International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). Previous recent releases by scientists suggested that as a planetary civilization we needed to hold CO2 to 400 parts per million (ppm) in the atmosphere (the planet is currently at 387ppm) to avoid a planet wide climate catastrophe. The new report shows that, because of new understandings about rapid feedback effects in the planetary system, it is now clear that we must instead -reduce- levels of CO2 in the atmosphere from their current levels -down- to at least 350ppm, and possibly even lower than 300ppm. This new information gives us iron clad credibility in our renewable energy, mass transit, localization and efficiency campaigns to sharply state that catastrophic climate, and therefore planetary and human civilizational change is unavoidable unless we immediately switch to a zero carbon emissions economy and food system, AND use rapid soil building, biodynamic agriculture and forest watershed management, in order to draw carbon back -down- out of the atmosphere as rapidly as possible. (Among other realities, this clearly amplifies that biofuel crop production, which is inherently monocultural and forest/soil disturbing, is even more untenable than we have already begun to realize from the serious warning signs of the planetary food crisis.) The previous alarm that I and others sounded that we must cut our CO2 emissions 100% by 2030 is now outdated. The new alarm is that we must both reduce our emissions to zero as quickly as possible, and, completely reform our global agriculture systems to become biodynamically self sustaining (using zero fossil fuel inputs) -and- designed to rapidly pull carbon back down into the soil creating new -feet- of topsoil in decades. (Note that there are already permaculture agriculture techniques that are actively achieving this amount of soil building - we now must simply make these techniques our new global way of life.) To see a report about the new release go to: http://www.care2.com/c2c/share/detail/740711 To see the scientific release itself go to: http://www.columbia.edu/~jeh1/2008/TargetCO2_20080407.pdf This all gives us the best argument we have had to date to insist that our communities take immediate action. Instead of talking in generalities of how global CO2 output must be reduced by various percentages, we can now simply focus on our own local infrastructures and food systems and start setting more immediate rapid targets for specific changes; such as 100% mass transit accessibility by 2018, 100% zero carbon electricity by 2023, a local biodynamic food growth and distribution system by 2028 etc. We can now shift from setting vague targets for climate composition, and instead start setting specific dated targets for specific critical municipal tasks. We have now moved from and age of climate activism based on amorphous scientific figures, to a new phase of climate rescue based on actual near term and large scale infrastructure tasks in our own communities and food systems. The new mantra can now be: Specific complete infrastructure changes must be made - as quickly as possible. peace Eric Brooks -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." – Che Guevara

1 0

Santa Fe, NM Bus Riding Jump Linked To Gas Costs
by Eric Brooks 02 Jun '08

02 Jun '08

http://license.icopyright.net/user/viewFreeUse.act?fuid=MTEwNDY3OA== June 1, 2008 Bus ridership jump linked to gas costs " Mike Trujillo clung to the bar overhead as the city bus jostled through rush-hour traffic. He stood for the beginning of his ride because every seat on the Cerrillos Road bus was occupied by hip-to-hip passengers, and six others also surfed the bus aisle that afternoon. Full buses used to be an oddity for Santa Fe's public transportation system, but as the price of fuel climbs toward $4 per gallon, more people are using the system than ever. Last month, ridership on Santa Fe Trails increased about 14 percent over April 2007, and, although numbers are not compiled for May, both bus drivers and riders say buses get more crowded by the day. "I hear people all the time, constantly, talking about how the prices of gas are going up and they are going to start riding the bus," said driver Sonya Lopez. Friday's national gas-price averages continued at record highs of $3.96 per gallon, with a state average at $3.90 and a Santa Fe average of $3.89 per gallon. Lopez has been a driver for three years, but during the last three weeks she's started to notice more passengers on her Route 6, which serves the southeastern edge of town. Instead of two or three passengers heading home on a recent afternoon, her bus had nearly a dozen. Back on the Cerrillos Road Route 2, Trujillo began his ride around Fifth Street at about 5 p.m., heading home Friday from work to an apartment along Airport Road. A broken starter on his car was the impetus for his sojourn into public transit, but now that he's gotten used to the idea, Trujillo said he might just sell the junker. "It's a lot cheaper now to ride the bus," he said. "It's the gas. It's going way up. It's too too much." Another bonus of riding, he said after nabbing the seat of a departing passenger, is that he avoids the frustration of piloting past construction on Cerrillos Road. Instead, the 36-year-old was striking up conversations with the driver and running into an old Capital High School classmate he hadn't seen in years. Retiree Gerry Arnold seemed glad to have a seat across the aisle on his trip home from volunteering at a Plaza tourist information booth. Arnold has been riding the bus downtown two times a week for about three weeks since he got fed up with both gas costs and downtown parking. For seniors who pay 50-cent fares, it's a much cheaper alternative. "I probably will go downtown a lot more now," he said. Arnold drives from his home in Park Plazas to the Santa Fe Place mall to catch the bus, a trick several teenagers also used last week. Teens also get the 50-cent fare, while adults pay $1. Increases in transit ridership are good for the city and its residents, said Santa Fe Transit Division Director Jon Bulthuis, who said gas-price hikes have had an obvious correlation with ridership. "What I see as a good value out of this is that people are becoming aware of an asset that was already in the community and they are starting to make choices that are both good for their personal budgets, but are also good for reducing traffic congestion and all the positive environmental things that go along with public transportation." Although one gripe about the system is that lesser-used routes are not as frequent as the Cerrillos Road spine, Bulthuis said greater ridership could change that. "The more we see people taking advantage of the system, the more likely it will be that the council will look to add services," he said. Other public transit systems are also seeing more riders, including services to rural communities such as Española and Taos provided by the North Central Regional Transit District, and the Northern New Mexico Park and Ride commuter buses provided by the state. Ridership between Santa Fe and Los Alamos jumped by 13 percent between April 2007 and last month, and about 44 percent more workers than last year are riding those buses between Santa Fe and Albuquerque, a figure that takes into a account that bus service became more frequent on the route during that time. The state has also invested $400 million in a commuter train that is already running in the Albuquerque area and will link to Santa Fe by the end of the year. Additional services are planned toward the end the year including later service on Route 2 and greater frequency on Route 4. /Contact Julie Ann Grimm <mailto:jgrimm@sfnewmexican.com> at 986-3017 or jgrimm(a)sfnewmexican.com./ [iCopyright] © 2008 The New Mexican, Inc.. Permission granted for up to 6 e-mails. All rights reserved. You may forward this article or get additional permissions by typing | http://license.icopyright.net/3.7515?icx_id=Bus-ridership-jump-linked-to-ga… | <http://license.icopyright.net/3.7515?icx_id=Bus-ridership-jump-linked-to-ga…> into any web browser. The New Mexican, Inc. and The Santa Fe New Mexican logos are registered trademarks of The New Mexican, Inc.. The iCopyright logo is a registered trademark of iCopyright, Inc. -- "I am not a liberator. Liberators do not exist. The people liberate themselves." -- Che Guevara

1 0