- Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

reminder - Transpo meeting on Tuesday, 7-9
by John-Marc Chandonia 30 Jul '07

30 Jul '07

Hi, Reminder - this month's Transpo meeting is on Tuesday from 7-9. Dave Snyder is expected to stop by from 7:45-8:30. The plan is to finalize endorsement language for presentation to the GM on the MTA charter ammendment(s). There have been significant changes to Peskin's, so we'll need to examine those in more detail. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/

1 0

Draft language endorsing No on SFSOS parking initiative
by John-Marc Chandonia 21 Jul '07

21 Jul '07

Here's draft language for a No endorsement, which we'll be deciding on at our GM this week. Please send any comments and ammendments before then, so I can revise the draft. Prop Z (Gridlock for Neighborhoods) - NO The SF Green Party strongly endorses a NO vote on Prop Z. Prop Z is an initiative backed by Republicans and a parking lot development corporation that would slow MUNI service, increase housing costs, add to traffic gridlock, remove trees, and create dangerous conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. Prop Z would require a minimum number of parking spaces to be built for each new housing unit, making housing more expensive and requiring that limited space be used to store cars instead of creating badly needed housing. Prop Z would even override neighborhood development plans that call for fewer parking spaces in dense and transit-rich neighborhoods. Most San Franciscans have supported these plans in order to preserve their community's livability and character. Prop Z would bring an influx of cars to all neighborhoods, resulting in traffic gridlock, dangerous conditions for cyclists, and even slower MUNI service. Worse, Prop Z would allow developers to add private driveways and garage entrances wherever they want, eliminating public on-street parking, MUNI stops, and sidewalk trees. More private driveways would make it harder to find on-street parking, and more cars pulling in and out of garages would be dangerous for pedestrians. Removal of many street trees would be a detriment to the character and beauty of our city. Prop Z is greenwashed with some minor concessions to car-sharing. Dont be fooled. The SF Green Party strongly urges you to vote NO on Prop Z. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/

1 1

Fw: Re: [SFGP-A] Draft language endorsing No on SFSOS parking initiati ve
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 15 Jul '07

15 Jul '07

Please note: forwarded message attached Hi John-Marc, I'm confused -- I thought we were going to take up Prop Z on July 31 at the Transpo meeting? Otherwise, I like this (with one or two edits and the clarification that the "concessions to car-sharing" are illusoriy in that such concessions already exist in city code, I believe). We might even want to add in the opening paragraph that Prop Z would reduce on-street parking availability, although that is not something we address in our plank. Another point that I think it might be even more crucial to add in the opening paragraph is that Prop Z would override all neighborhood efforts to influence the planning for their own communities. Sue Please note: message attached Here's draft language for a No endorsement, which we'll be deciding on at our GM this week. Please send any comments and ammendments before then, so I can revise the draft. Prop Z (Gridlock for Neighborhoods) - NO The SF Green Party strongly endorses a NO vote on Prop Z. Prop Z is an initiative backed by Republicans and a parking lot development corporation that would slow MUNI service, increase housing costs, add to traffic gridlock, remove trees, and create dangerous conditions for pedestrians and cyclists. Prop Z would require a minimum number of parking spaces to be built for each new housing unit, making housing more expensive and requiring that limited space be used to store cars instead of creating badly needed housing. Prop Z would even override neighborhood development plans that call for fewer parking spaces in dense and transit-rich neighborhoods. Most San Franciscans have supported these plans in order to preserve their community's livability and character. Prop Z would bring an influx of cars to all neighborhoods, resulting in traffic gridlock, dangerous conditions for cyclists, and even slower MUNI service. Worse, Prop Z would allow developers to add private driveways and garage entrances wherever they want, eliminating public on-street parking, MUNI stops, and sidewalk trees. More private driveways would make it harder to find on-street parking, and more cars pulling in and out of garages would be dangerous for pedestrians. Removal of many street trees would be a detriment to the character and beauty of our city. Prop Z is greenwashed with some minor concessions to car-sharing. Dont be fooled. The SF Green Party strongly urges you to vote NO on Prop Z. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/

1 0

Re: [Transpo] next TWG meeting - 7/31
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 06 Jul '07

06 Jul '07

Ok, I'm actually interviewing Dave Snyder on my show that night and I probably will not be able to get out of the studio until 8 p.m. at the earliest. Sue Hi, I'll be out of town for our regularly scheduled TWG meeting this month, so I'm proposing 7/31 (Tuesday night) at our usual time (7-9) as an alternative. I hope that works for everybody, since it's the 5th Tuesday of the month and therefore unlikely to conflict with other regularly scheduled meetings. Dave Snyder will come by to discuss the MTA amendments before we make a final recommendation to the GM. JMC

1 0

next TWG meeting - 7/31
by John-Marc Chandonia 06 Jul '07

06 Jul '07

Hi, I'll be out of town for our regularly scheduled TWG meeting this month, so I'm proposing 7/31 (Tuesday night) at our usual time (7-9) as an alternative. I hope that works for everybody, since it's the 5th Tuesday of the month and therefore unlikely to conflict with other regularly scheduled meetings. Dave Snyder will come by to discuss the MTA amendments before we make a final recommendation to the GM. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/

1 0

Re: [Transpo] [SFGP-A] Endorsement of MTA Charter Amendments
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

Do get Dave SNyder to weigh in in that in conversation with him recently, he expressed concerns about Jake's proposal. Sue Hi, The language I sent on the MTA amendments is my proposed draft language; sorry if that was not clear. The SFGP has not endorsed either measure. My draft language is based on my reading of the 2 measures, which I got from the Supervisors' aides, and on feedback from others at the May Transpo WG. If Dave or anybody else has concerns or amendments about the language, please email me and copy the Transpo WG list. Early feedback is better than waiting until the GM and trying to propose changes to the wording from the floor. I wouldn't propose the GM endorse these until they're officially on the ballot in any case. The main reason I posted this to the active list (besides wanting to get more input) is to get feedback on the idea of doing longer statements on the reasons behind our endorsements, in addition to just a yes/no endorsement. This will take some work, but a longer statement should make our position clearer to voters, especially in cases where we don't reach consensus on endorsement (e.g., recent bond measures and the gun control measure). If we do a newspaper, it will be very like the Alameda Greens' version (probably even using their template and printer). That means it will include a slate card for voters to take to the polls, as well as a fundraising pitch. We should discuss the newspaper idea at the CIWG meeting tonight. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org)

1 0

Endorsement of MTA Charter Amendments
by John-Marc Chandonia 03 Jul '07

03 Jul '07

Hi, This year, rather than issuing simple yes/no endorsements of propositions, I'd like to include language explaining our endorsement, which we can put on our web site or (if we're well organized) into a newspaper like the Alameda Greens produce. Here's my proposed language for the MTA props. Please send any concerns and amendments to the language. Also, there has been a suggestion that we ask both McGoldrick and Peskin to hold off introducing these until next year. If they're on the February (Primary) ballot, turnout will be higher and probably more progressive. What do others think of this strategy? Prop X (McGoldrick): YES Prop X would allow the Board of Supervisors and Controller to have more oversight of the MTA, the board of directors that runs MUNI and the Department of Parking and Traffic. Currently, the MTA is entirely appointed by the Mayor, and produces an anual budget that may include changes in service, MUNI fares, and parking rates. The Board of Supervisors may not modify this budget, and can only reject it by a 2/3 supermajority vote. In other City departments, the Board approves the budget by simple majority vote, and may make changes so long as the overall budget remains balanced. If Prop X passes, the Board of Supervisors would have the same authority over the MTA budget as they do over the proposed budgets of other City departments. This would give Supervisors the ability to respond to their constituents' concerns about proposed route changes or fare increases, by re-allocating money from other parts of the City budget. Prop X also gives the Controller the responsibility for negotiating contracts to evaluate the quality of MTA service. These contracts are currently negotiated by the MTA itself, so Prop X would allow a more independent and unbiased review. The SF Green Party encourages voters to vote YES on Prop X, as it would allow more independent oversight over the MTA, and more grassroots input into MUNI fare and service changes. Prop Y (Peskin): YES The MTA is a mayor-appointed board of directors that runs MUNI and the Department of Parking and Traffic. Their major functions include approving changes to MUNI service, fares, and parking rates in public garages. Prop Y will make a variety of changes to the MTA, described below: The most significant change is that all future increases in parking revenue (from meters, public garages, and parking tickets) will go to MUNI, rather than the current requirement that 50% be returned to the General Fund for other uses. This change would be an important increase in funding for public transit. The MTA would also be given more responsibility for installation of stop signs and traffic signals, which would allow them to install transit priority signals to allow buses and trains to move faster. This is a policy the SF Green Party has advocated for several years in the Transportation plank of our platform. Prop Y makes two major changes to MUNI salaries. Currently, the transit operators' wage scale is capped at the average of the two highest transit operators' wage scales at other major transit systems in the US. Under Prop Y, the operators' minimum salary would be calculated using this method (i.e., the salary cap would become a salary floor). Prop Y would also change managers' pay: at least 10% of the pay for the MUNI director and managers would be contingent on meeting service standards set by the MTA board. The SF Green Party has some concerns that the minimum salary for operators would leave little room for negotiating work rules and benefits, but we agree with linking managers' pay to performance. Finally, Prop Y would require the MTA to set goals to cut carbon emissions, by reducing private car trips and increasing bicycling. This provision is largely symbolic, as nothing in the measure would directly help to accomplish either goal. The SF Green Party encourages voters to vote YES on Prop Y, as directing increased parking revenues for the MUNI represents an important long-term investment in public transit, and because transit priority signals are one necessary condition for efficient MUNI service. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/

1 1

Re: [Transpo] reminder - Wednesday meeting to discuss MUNI charter ref orm
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 30 Jun '07

30 Jun '07

It's unlikely that I will be able to make it to the meeting. However, I did read Peskin's charter amendment prior to a discussion about the item at the Sierra Club. Not that I remember the details. I took notes, but I can't remember where I left them. If I remember correctly, the reform empowers the MTA to raise parking fees and dedicate all the increase in parking fees to public transit. It also reforms some of the relationship between the employees and the management -- and it's my understanding that the unions are not happy about the changes. Sue Please note: message attached Hi, This is a reminder that the Transpo WG will meet tomorrow night from 7-9 to discuss the Peskin and McGoldrick MUNI charter reform amendments. I sent copies of both to the Transpo list, so members of that group can find them in the archives. Peskin's is fairly coplicated, so please read it before the meeting. If anybody else needs copies of the legislation, let me know. JMC

3 3

Fwd: Worldwatch: Planet Gets a Lemon as Global Car Industry Revs Up
by Ann Garrison 29 Jun '07

29 Jun '07

And Schwarzenegger, our Jolly Green Governor, wants to build more freeways instead of a bullet train. > From: Darcey Rakestraw <DRakestraw(a)worldwatch.org> > Date: June 27, 2007 8:32:24 AM PDT > To: Darcey Rakestraw <DRakestraw(a)worldwatch.org> > Subject: Worldwatch: Planet Gets a Lemon as Global Car Industry > Revs Up > > FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE > Wednesday, June 27, 2007 > > Contact: Darcey Rakestraw > (+1 202) 452.1992 x517 > drakestraw(a)worldwatch.org > > > Planet Gets a Lemon as Global Car Industry Revs Up > > 2006 U.S. Fleet Heaviest in Three Decades as Gas Prices Soar > > > WASHINGTON, D.C.-The world's auto manufacturers produced a record > 67 million vehicles in 2006, putting more cars on the road than > ever before, according to a new Vital Signs Update from the > Worldwatch Institute. While global production grew 4 percent last > year, China increased its production by nearly 30 percent, > overtaking Germany to become the third largest producer. > > "America's car addiction is becoming a global phenomenon with no > sign of reversing," says Worldwatch Senior Researcher Michael > Renner, who authored the update. "This trend begs immediate and > innovative transportation solutions to address the consumption of > fossil fuels that is harming our climate." > > China's rise represents the most dramatic change in the world auto > industry, with production there more than quintupling in the last > decade. Sales within China surpassed the 3 million mark in 2005, > with nearly 9 million passenger cars on the country's roads. While > this is still a comparatively small fleet, it is likely to grow > rapidly in coming years, and China is expected to become a major > exporter within the next four years. > > Traffic congestion, road accidents, air pollution, climate change, > and peak oil are all challenges the world faces from car-centered > transportation, according to the Institute's State of the World > 2007 report. On average, urban car travel uses nearly twice as much > energy as urban bus travel. > > Despite growing awareness of environmental impacts from burning > fossil fuels, consumers have generally been slow to adopt more fuel- > efficient vehicles. However, the rise in oil prices and concerns > about climate change in recent years have spurred interest in more > efficient vehicles, including low-emission diesels and hybrids. > Toyota, the largest distributor of hybrid gasoline-electric cars, > sold 312,500 hybrids in 2006 and expects to sell 430,000 in 2007. > Dozens of new hybrid vehicle models are under development by Toyota > and other companies. > > Governments are increasingly eager to regulate fuel economy and > carbon dioxide emissions. In the late 1990s, car manufacturers > selling to the European Union voluntarily agreed to reduce carbon > emissions to 140 grams per kilometer by 2008, but they have not yet > come close to meeting this target. In response, the EU decided to > impose mandatory limits requiring further cuts to 130 grams per > kilometer. Meanwhile, California sued six of the world's largest > automakers over climate change, charging that greenhouse gases from > their vehicles have caused billions of dollars in damages. China's > first national mandatory fuel economy standards went into force in > July 2005, and a more stringent second phase will be introduced in > January 2008. > > In the United States, where the 2006 model year included the > heaviest vehicles in three decades, the Senate passed an energy > bill last week that includes an increase in average fuel economy > from 25 to 35 miles per gallon for cars, SUVs, and pickup trucks by > 2020. > > "With more cars on the road year after year, regulating auto fuel > consumption and emissions alone is not a solution. What is truly > needed is a transportation revolution," says Renner. "Cities from > Bogotá to London are decreasing their dependence on cars, and many > more cities could follow their example. We need denser cities with > better land-use practices and a commitment to public > transportation." Innovative transportation solutions, such as bus > rapid transit and light rail, are already helping to green urban > transportation, according to State of the World 2007. > > - END - > > Note to Editors: > > To obtain the full report, or to interview the author, contact > Darcey Rakestraw at drakestraw(a)worldwatch.org or 202-452-1992 x 517. > > Worldwatch E-mail list: If you would like to receive Worldwatch > press advisories regularly or wish to be removed from this mailing > list, please send your request to Darcey Rakestraw at > drakestraw(a)worldwatch.org or call 202.452.1992 x517. > > About the Worldwatch Institute: The Worldwatch Institute is an > independent research organization based in Washington, DC. Through > accessible, fact-based analysis of critical global issues, > Worldwatch helps to inform people around the world about the > complex interactions among people, nature, and economies. For more > information, visit www.worldwatch.org. > > Darcey Rakestraw > > Communications Manager, Worldwatch Institute > > 1776 Massachusetts Avenue, NW, Suite 800 > > Washington, DC 20036 > > phone: 202-452-1992 x 517 > > cel: 202-210-0152 > > fax: 202-296-7365 > > drakestraw(a)worldwatch.org > > h. for MAYOR!!! Ahimsa for MAYOR!!! Diamond Dave for Mayor!!! Anyone but Laurence Pelosi's cousin Gavin for MAYOR!!! ---Ann Garrison anniegarrison(a)mac.com (415) 285-7259 (415) 786-3896 "El Baradei has as much chance of stopping proliferation as George Bush has of stopping the drug trade." --Craig Reishus, Nuclear Free Future Awards, http://www.nuclear- free.com/english/frames7.htm

1 0

OOPS! District 3 Dem Club Forum On Muni Reform Already Happened..
by Eric Brooks 27 Jun '07

27 Jun '07

OOPS! I thought it was July. How did it go? dave(a)livablecity.org wrote: > except that you missed it. It was Monday. > >> Hi all, >> >> The D3 Dem Club has often broken the mold and supported Green candidates >> and causes. >> Some of us should definitely show up at this forum as friendly >> participants to counter the inevitable nonsense that will be put forward >> by Andrew Sullivan (who has been invited to attend - the club likes to >> foster active debate); especially those of you like John-Marc who have a >> really tight grasp of Muni issues. >> >> [begin forward] >> >> The District 3 Democratic Club wrote: >> >> Addition to prior meeting notification: we'll also be welcoming panelist >> SPUR Transportation Policy Director Dave Snyder. All other details >> remain the same. Thanks & hope to see you there for another fun forum! >> >> DATE: >> Monday, June 25th, 6pm - 8:15pm >> >> LOCATION: >> Bocce Café (478 Green St, SF 94133, cross street Grant St (North Beach)) >> in the back outdoor covered area >> http://boccecafe.com/ >> >> PANELISTS: >> * President of the Board of Supervisors Aaron Peskin * >> * Chairman of Rescue MUNI, Andy Sullivan (www.rescuemuni.org) * >> * SPUR Transportation Policy Director Dave Snyder (www.spur.org) * >> >> AGENDA: >> 6 - 6:30pm Mix & mingle, reception (no host bar) >> 6:30 - 8:15pm Forum discussion followed by Q&A >> >> DESCRIPTION: >> The recent MUNI T-Third light-rail line was introduced to much fanfare >> but had numerous issues sparking widespread criticism and a wider >> community debate on the poor state of our city's transportation system. >> Supervisor Peskin has responded to recent MUNI woes with a charter >> amendment that includes the following measures for the Municipal >> Transportation Agency (MTA): >> * Allocate all revenue from The City's parking garages and meters to the >> MTA >> * Revoke the agency's non-negotiable salary formula, which keeps its >> operators among the highest paid in the country >> * Give the agency more time to adopt its budget. >> * Incent MTA executives with bonuses for increased ridership >> * Require in the city's constitution that the MTA produce a plan to >> reduce carbon emissions from all vehicles and increase ridership >> While the amendment addresses important areas in need of improvement, >> labor union representatives have indicated that drivers salaries are not >> so much the issue as the ongoing budget deficit. Please join us as >> Supervisor Peskin sheds more details on this significant ballot measure >> and the panelists and attendees join in this fascinating discussion. >> >> >> ARTICLES: >> http://www.examiner.com/a-678076~Peskin_to_make_Muni_reform_push.html >> >> http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/06/10/MNGR0QCTEC1.DTL… >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Transpo mailing list >> Transpo(a)sfgreens.org >> https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo > >

1 0