- Transpo - list.sfgreens.org

Re: [Transpo] ALL: We Need To Consense On New Meeting Day/Time
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 08 Apr '07

08 Apr '07

Third Tuesdays do NOT work for me as that is the night I have a Sierra Club meeting. Third Thursdays are fine. Sue -- John-Marc Chandonia <jmc(a)sfgreens.org> wrote: On Sat, Apr 07, 2007 at 01:42:15PM -0700, Eric Brooks wrote: > Thursdays are best for me. > > I'm thinking we could do third Tuesdays or third Thursdays. Both of those work for me. I posted a list of all the WG meeting days/times about a week ago, so anybody else prefers another date, make sure it isn't already taken. JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/ _______________________________________________ Transpo mailing list Transpo(a)sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo

1 0

Excellent Short Audio On The Biofuels Myth
by Eric Brooks 07 Apr '07

07 Apr '07

Excellent Short Audio On The Biofuels Myth To point others to listen to a great audio interview that packs almost every major problem with biofuels into one 9 minute interview go to: http://www.radio4all.net/index.php?op=program-info&program_id=22490&nav=&

2 8

URGENT!: This Sunday On The KPFA Radio 'Sunday Salon' Biofuels Call-In!
by Eric Brooks 07 Apr '07

07 Apr '07

Hey again all, I'm not sure whether it is going to be the first or second hour, but -Biofuels- will be the subject of discussion of one of the two hours that make up the KPFA call-in program 'Sunday Salon' this Sunday from 9am to 11am. It will be critical for those of you who are best educated on why biofuels are so bad to try to call in and get a word in edgewise. In San Francisco and Berkeley, listen live at 94.1 FM, or at http://www.kpfa.org/ Eric B michael_poremba(a)yahoo.com wrote: > Wow, excellent to see bio-fuel science being discussed in detail! > > I hope that you're all planning to attend the bio-fuels presentation > coming up this Tuesday evening at the Pacific Energy Center. A > scientist from Lawrence Berkeley will be talking about, among other > points, the problem of scaling up bio-fuel production. It's > interesting to see this problem from a big picture perspective, going > beyond discussing the various technical options in front of us, to > what it's going to take to make a real difference in today's energy > usage patterns. > > --Michael P. > ----- Original Message ---- > From: Eric Brooks <> > To: Transportation WG <transpo(a)sfgreens.org>; sustainability(a)sfgreens.org > Sent: Friday, April 6, 2007 2:45:35 PM > Subject: Re: [Sustain] Continued: Biofuel & Algae Debate > > John-Marc and all, > > We should definitely discuss all of this in both working groups, > however people that can't come to the meetings should also benefit > from this exchange. > > Below are my latest responses in three sections that will be a bit > easier to wade through... :) > [...snip...] > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > _______________________________________________ > Sustainability mailing list > Sustainability(a)sfgreens.org > https://list.sfgreens.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/sustainability >

1 0

Re: [Transpo] SFBC Response to Critical Mass Media
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 06 Apr '07

06 Apr '07

We could -- but personally, I have a lot of issues with Critical Mass. I'm turned off by the banshee antagonism of certain elements, the elements that may have been responsible for what happened last Friday night -- not my friends who ride in Critical Mass who I know are respectful. Sue -- Susan King <funking(a)mindspring.com> wrote: Folx, there are lots of us who are both sympathetic and supportive of Critical Mass, and are advocates for measures that improve conditions for cycling everyday. Do we want to put out a statement in support of groups like the SFBC and/or a statement about our opinion on Critical Mass, SF Cycling and our key value on anti-violence? Let me know what you all think we should do here. Here is an email from Leah, sent today. peace, susan > From Leah Shahum, Executive Director of the SFBC: > > Dear Susan, > > By now you have probably seen the media frenzy around incidents at > last Friday's Critical Mass ride. Hopefully you've also seen the > SFBC's response see www.sfbike.org. > > First, we want to make sure that all members understand that the > SFBC does not organize nor manage Critical Mass rides. We never > have, we never will. This is a leaderless ride that the SFBC has no > control over. > > We condemn any sort of violence on the ride whether by bicyclists > or motorists. Of course, we condemn violence on our streets > anytime, anywhere. > > It seems that there are two sides to what happened Friday night, > which is now coming to light in the media. It sounds like there's > blame to be shared by both sides. > > Our goal now is to make sure that people understand that the SFBC > is working day in and day out to promote safe, joyful bicycling in > our city. Our message is and always has been that we all need to > Coexist, to behave civilly and respectfully, and to share the road. > > We urge our city leaders not to let one night's ugly actions slow > down the work we're all doing to make San Francisco a great > bicycling city. > > Help us out by spreading the word that the SFBC does not organize > Critical Mass and that we condemn any violence on our streets, > whether biking or driving. Let folks know about the good work the > SFBC is responsible for more bike lanes, better bike parking, > more bike access on transit, more people choosing to bike for a > cleaner, healthier San Francisco. > > You can let folks know that just yesterday, our volunteers handed > out hundreds of safety flyers to bicyclists Give Respect, Get > Respect at the corner of Market & Van Ness Ave. We're gearing up > now for lots more outreach on Bike to Work Day May 17th! > > And we're organizing community members to speak in support of the > Healthy Saturdays trial of car-free space in Golden Gate Park on > Saturdays just like Sundays. (** We are looking for more supporters > this Monday, April 9th at 1pm at City Hall. Please join us! If you > want us to call you when the item is up, email Andy before Monday > a.m.) > > Thank you for helping us educate people that the SFBC is not > Critical Mass, but is responsible for a lot of the transportation, > safety, and open space improvements they're seeing around town. > > Let's ride responsibly and proudly. > Thank you for your support, > > Leah Shahum > SFBC Executive Director > > > > You are subscribed to this list as funking(a)mindspring.com. Click > here to unsubscribe, or send email to unsubscribe. > 159546.133504059.8009057315171969085- > funking_mindspring.com(a)en.groundspring.org. > > Our postal address is > 995 Market St Ste 1550 > San Francisco, California 94103 > United States > > _______________________________________________ Transpo mailing list Transpo(a)sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo

2 1

SFBC Response to Critical Mass Media
by Susan King 05 Apr '07

05 Apr '07

Folx, there are lots of us who are both sympathetic and supportive of Critical Mass, and are advocates for measures that improve conditions for cycling everyday. Do we want to put out a statement in support of groups like the SFBC and/or a statement about our opinion on Critical Mass, SF Cycling and our key value on anti-violence? Let me know what you all think we should do here. Here is an email from Leah, sent today. peace, susan > From Leah Shahum, Executive Director of the SFBC: > > Dear Susan, > > By now you have probably seen the media frenzy around incidents at > last Friday's Critical Mass ride. Hopefully you've also seen the > SFBC's response — see www.sfbike.org. > > First, we want to make sure that all members understand that the > SFBC does not organize nor manage Critical Mass rides. We never > have, we never will. This is a leaderless ride that the SFBC has no > control over. > > We condemn any sort of violence on the ride — whether by bicyclists > or motorists. Of course, we condemn violence on our streets > anytime, anywhere. > > It seems that there are two sides to what happened Friday night, > which is now coming to light in the media. It sounds like there's > blame to be shared by both sides. > > Our goal now is to make sure that people understand that the SFBC > is working day in and day out to promote safe, joyful bicycling in > our city. Our message is and always has been that we all need to > Coexist, to behave civilly and respectfully, and to share the road. > > We urge our city leaders not to let one night's ugly actions slow > down the work we're all doing to make San Francisco a great > bicycling city. > > Help us out by spreading the word that the SFBC does not organize > Critical Mass and that we condemn any violence on our streets, > whether biking or driving. Let folks know about the good work the > SFBC is responsible for — more bike lanes, better bike parking, > more bike access on transit, more people choosing to bike for a > cleaner, healthier San Francisco. > > You can let folks know that just yesterday, our volunteers handed > out hundreds of safety flyers to bicyclists — Give Respect, Get > Respect — at the corner of Market & Van Ness Ave. We're gearing up > now for lots more outreach on Bike to Work Day — May 17th! > > And we're organizing community members to speak in support of the > Healthy Saturdays trial of car-free space in Golden Gate Park on > Saturdays just like Sundays. (** We are looking for more supporters > this Monday, April 9th at 1pm at City Hall. Please join us! If you > want us to call you when the item is up, email Andy before Monday > a.m.) > > Thank you for helping us educate people that the SFBC is not > Critical Mass, but is responsible for a lot of the transportation, > safety, and open space improvements they're seeing around town. > > Let's ride responsibly and proudly. > Thank you for your support, > > Leah Shahum > SFBC Executive Director > > > > You are subscribed to this list as funking(a)mindspring.com. Click > here to unsubscribe, or send email to unsubscribe. > 159546.133504059.8009057315171969085- > funking_mindspring.com(a)en.groundspring.org. > > Our postal address is > 995 Market St Ste 1550 > San Francisco, California 94103 > United States > >

1 0

Fwd: Join Press Conference For Solar-Wind Powered San Francisco - Next Tue, Apr 10, Noon, SF City Hall, Polk St. Side
by Eric Brooks 05 Apr '07

05 Apr '07

Hi all, Next *Tuesday, April 10, 12 Noon*, at the *Polk Street entrance of San Francisco City Hall* - * At long last there will be a historic announcement of the introduction of the final implementing legislation for the Community Choice Energy project, to make San Francisco 50% Solar and Wind powered within the next decade! Join Supervisors Tom Ammiano and Ross Mirkarimi, Local Power, Our City, Sierra Club, Greenpeace and many others, as we announce the introduction of this bold new project! /_ _/**_DETAILS_* */WHEN:/* *12 Noon, Tuesday, April 10 / WHERE: /San Francisco City Hall - Polk Street Side (off Polk between Grove & McAllister - From Civic Center MUNI/BART cross United Nations Plaza to City Hall) /WEAR: /A sky blue shirt or jacket if you have one - for visual effect (we have some t-shirts available) _/RSVP:/_ To coordinate with us, if you plan to attend, please reply to this message with 'I'll Be There' in the subject heading and your contact information in the reply.** _WHY THIS EVENT IS SO IMPORTANT_ **Historic Vote At Last Approaches* After many years of hard work by Local Power, Our City, Sierra Club, Greenpeace, The SF Green Party, Supervisors Tom Ammiano and Ross Mirkarimi, and many other organizers, San Francisco's Board of Supervisors is at last only a month away from a final vote on the project plan for Community Choice Energy, which will make San Francisco the most Solar and Wind powered city in the world, running on 50% clean renewable energy, within the next decade. *PG&E Could Addict Us To Dirty Energy If We Don't Act Now! *The California Public Utilities Commission has given PG&E the opening to beat renewable energy to the punch, and force every city in California to pay for 8 new fossil fuel power plants,* /and a dangerous 30 year extension of its nuclear power production at Diablo Canyon/.* PG&E is about to join the Williams company to bring in massive amounts of liquid natural gas for electricity production through a huge pipeline planned to be built from Coos Bay Oregon to Northern California. *_DETAILS_* */WHEN:/* *12 Noon, Tuesday, April 10 / WHERE: /San Francisco City Hall - Polk Street Side (off Polk between Grove & McAllister - From Civic Center MUNI/BART cross United Nations Plaza to City Hall) /WEAR: /A sky blue shirt or jacket if you have one - for visual effect (we have some t-shirts available) _/RSVP:/_ To coordinate with us, if you plan to attend, please reply to this message with 'I'll Be There' in the subject heading and your contact information in the reply.** *See you there! peace, Eric Brooks Campaign Coordinator Our City http://our-city.org 415-756-8844 /This update posted by: Our City 1028-A Howard St. San Francisco, CA 94103 415-756-8844 For more information about Our City campaigns go to: http://www.our-city.org info(a)our-city.org ### If you have joined this list in error and wish to unsubscribe, send a reply to info(a)our-city.org with the word 'Unsubscribe' in the subject line./

1 0

Re: [Transpo] Excellent Short Audio On The Biofuels Myth
by susan_e_vaughan＠juno.com 05 Apr '07

05 Apr '07

I have seen that Eric has responded to this, but I'm putting my replies below John-Marc's responses, between the =...= Sue -- John-Marc Chandonia <jmc(a)sfgreens.org> wrote: On Tue, Apr 03, 2007 at 02:01:58AM -0700, Eric Brooks wrote: > We can't get around conservation of energy here. The algae has to be fed > with something. The carbon has to come from somewhere. There is no free > lunch. Hence anything that will give us massive amounts of burnable > fuels, will have massive amounts of impact on the planetary ecosystem. The energy is solar, and the carbon comes from carbon dioxide. The cellulosic ethanol by itself won't be sufficient to replace our current oil needs, but every little bit might make the difference between a gradual "powerdown" in a peak oil scenario and total collapse. Cellulose (stalks) is essentially a free byproduct of growing food crops, and the energy we put into growing them already (for the food) is currently wasted. It's like the difference between letting the sunlight heat up your roof or putting on some solar panels to take advantage of it. =David Fridley is giving his presentation on the myth of biofuels Tuesday during our CC meeting. I'm very familiar with what he says. He reminds us that there is no such thing as a "free byproduct of growing food crops," as the detritus of food crops is essential for the renewal of the soil, especially in a system that of necessity is going to have to rely less and less on artificial fertilizer inputs.= > And as my previous post noted, the players that are getting into this > biofuels game are some of the most evil people on the planet. In a total collapse of civilization, even evil folks wouldn't be able to enjoy their current lifestyle. > They mentioned algae. They dovetailed it and all of the other crops with > genetic engineering. This stuff is all bad news that must be stopped > before it distracts us from taking real action to end the climate > crisis, while we instead wait a precious, deadly, decade or two for some > magic bullet that will allow us all to drive cars. This is a false dichotomy; there's no reason we can't both build mass transit and also develop biofuels. The amount of money necessary for either project is tiny compared to the cost of the war. Biofuels aren't a "distraction" from building mass transit when the public barely knows about them. I think in a poll, the public would prefer mass transit. > Why are we talking about convoluted esoteric ways to get liquid carbon > fuels out of algae, when we could meet our energy and transportation > needs with solar, wind, tidal, wave, etc. and electrified mass transit? Liquid carbon fuels are convenient, and more technologically practical to develop than other high density fuel storage options such as hydrogen or high density batteries. Almost all our existing infrastructure is built on them, so the transition would be much cheaper. =Eric, I think you are very unrealistic about the potential of solar, wind, tidal, and wave. Currently, all those "alternative" forms of energy generation account for less than one percent of the energy that is generated nationally. I think you need to start working the term "carbon tax" into your discussions, as we need to drastically reduce the amount of energy that we are using.= > These are off the shelf, affordable technologies, that can be employed > now; not speculative scientific processes which seek some sleight of > hand with which to defy the basic laws of physics. Which basic laws of physics are you referring to? Biofuels don't violate any of them any more than other energy sources that are ultimately solar powered. =Again, solar and wind and all those others account for less than one percent of our current energy generation.= JMC -- John-Marc Chandonia (jmc(a)sfgreens.org) http://sfgreens.org/ _______________________________________________ Transpo mailing list Transpo(a)sfgreens.org https://list.sfgreens.org/mailman/listinfo/transpo

2 1

Fwd: Free Lunch & Global Warming Solutions
by Susan King 03 Apr '07

03 Apr '07

More greenwashing action from Act for Change, fyi. People are still looking for ways to drive anywhere they want. peace, susan Begin forwarded message: > From: "ActForChange"<actforchange(a)act.actforchange.com> > Date: April 2, 2007 2:12:24 PM PDT > To: funking(a)mindspring.com > Subject: Free Lunch & Global Warming Solutions > Reply-To: "ActForChange "<actforchange- > ctgs5R0FD8Dx0A0A0BA(a)act.actforchange.com> > > > ACTFORCHANGE ACTIVISM UPDATE: April 2, 2007 > > SPECIAL OPPORTUNITY > > Join Us for Lunch with Sherry Boschert > > Your garage could hold a Plug-In Hybrid sooner than you think! > > When: Noon - 1:00 p.m., Wednesday April 4th > > Working Assets Presents Sherry Boschert author of "Plug-in Hybrids: > The Cars that Will Recharge America" > > According to the Union of Concerned Scientists, only four nations in > the world produce more heat-trapping carbon dioxide than the U.S. > vehicle fleet. So, how do we get serious about addressing global > warming? Sherry Boschert, the author of "Plug-in Hybrids: The Cars > that Will Recharge America," has some answers. Did you know that the > technology and infrastructure for plug-in hybrids exist today? Come > learn more, and enjoy a free lunch with other Bay Area Working Assets > members by clicking here: > http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/DM/y/es5R0FD8Dx0W5U0BZgv0E4 > > > *** Please share this message with anyone else in the Bay > Area who might be interested in this event. *** > > > Thank you for working to build a better world. > > Sarah Clusen Buecher > Citizen Action Manager > Working Assets > > P.S. The Working Assets Speaker Series includes a free lunch available > from 11:30 a.m. Please plan to arrive early as all guests go through > the security procedures of the building, which require picture ID. Due > to heightened security procedures, only people who have responded by > name in advance will be able to attend. 101 Market Street, first > floor, San Francisco. Free. Please note, there will be no admittance > after 12:15 p.m. Click here to RSVP now: > http://act.actforchange.com/cgi-bin7/DM/y/es5R0FD8Dx0W5U0BZgv0E4 > > > > > > Is this e-mail going to your junk/bulk folder? > Add actforchange(a)act.actforchange.com to your address book to > ensure that you receive all future communications in your in-box. > > To view our Privacy Policy, please click here: > http://www.workingforchange.com/about/privacy.cfm > > To unsubscribe or to make a change to your e-mail address > or newsletter subscriptions, please click here: > http://www.workingforchange.com/unsub/act_unsub.cfm? > emailaddr=funking(a)mindspring.com > > In our records you are: funking(a)mindspring.com. If you have any > comments or > questions, please e-mail info(a)actforchange.com. Or write to us at: 101 > Market Street, Suite 700, San Francisco, CA, 94105. >

1 0

Newsom Balks At Youth Pass Covering In-City BART Trips
by Eric Brooks 29 Mar '07

29 Mar '07

Newsom Balks At Youth Passes Covering In-City BART Trips Pretty amusing that he takes this position after publicly musing about free Muni a couple weeks ago... see below or: http://www.beyondchron.org/news/nucleus/plugins/print/print.php?itemid=4355 (3/4th's way down page) "At a March 27th meeting at City Hall, the San Francisco Youth Commission unveiled its budgetary priorities to an attentive and responsive Mayor Gavin Newsom. “Your priorities are certainly my priorities,” said Newsom after hearing all of the Commission’s various committees report out on their principal concerns. ... Newsom’s only moment of reluctance came in response to the Youth Commission’s proposal to have Youth Fast Passes on Muni to cover BART rides between Balboa Park and Embarcadero – as adult passes do. The Mayor agreed with the concept, but asked: “What’s the cost? Do we raise the fares for seniors? Do we cut lines?” He then elaborated on the $25.4 million budget deficit that the City faces this year." cheers Eric

1 0

NY Times OpEd - Gone Parkin'
by Susan King 29 Mar '07

29 Mar '07

A good op ed on a recent issue under discussion on this list: > Subject: [sfbike] NY Times OpEd - Gone Parkin' > > > I enjoyed Donald Shoup's OpEd in today's NY Times, although in the > beginning I had the image of certain auto-activists using increased > congestion due to lack of street parking as a bludgeon to the bike > plan EIR. Thankfully, the following paragraphs give a more > reasonable reaction - increasing meter rates. > > Of course another reaction is left unstated: don't drive, use a > bicycle. > > -fb > > from: > http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/29/opinion/29shoup.html?th&emc=th > =============================================== > March 29, 2007 > Op-Ed Contributor > Gone Parkin’ > By DONALD SHOUP > > Los Angeles > > MOST people view traffic with a mixture of rage and resignation: > rage because congestion wastes valuable time, resignation because, > well, what can anyone do about it? People have places to go, after > all; congestion seems inevitable. > > But a surprising amount of traffic isn’t caused by people who are > on their way somewhere. Rather, it is caused by those who have > already arrived. Streets are clogged, in part, by drivers searching > for a place to park. > > Several studies have found that cruising for curb parking generates > about 30 percent of the traffic in central business districts. In a > recent survey conducted by Bruce Schaller in the SoHo district in > Manhattan, 28 percent of drivers interviewed while they were > stopped at traffic lights said they were searching for curb > parking. A similar study conducted by Transportation Alternatives > in the Park Slope neighborhood in Brooklyn found that 45 percent of > drivers were cruising. > > When my students and I studied cruising for parking in a 15-block > business district in Los Angeles, we found the average cruising > time was 3.3 minutes, and the average cruising distance half a mile > (about 2.5 times around the block). This may not sound like much, > but with 470 parking meters in the district, and a turnover rate > for curb parking of 17 cars per space per day, 8,000 cars park at > the curb each weekday. Even a small amount of cruising time for > each car adds up to a lot of traffic. > > Over the course of a year, the search for curb parking in this 15- > block district created about 950,000 excess vehicle miles of travel > — equivalent to 38 trips around the earth, or four trips to the > moon. And here’s another inconvenient truth about underpriced curb > parking: cruising those 950,000 miles wastes 47,000 gallons of gas > and produces 730 tons of the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide. If all > this happens in one small business district, imagine the cumulative > effect of all cruising in the United States. > > What causes this astonishing waste? As is often the case, the > prices are wrong. A national study of downtown parking found that > the average price of curb parking is only 20 percent that of > parking in a garage, giving drivers a strong incentive to cruise. > As George Costanza once said on “Seinfeld”: “My father never paid > for parking, my mother, my brother, nobody. ... It’s like going to > a prostitute. Why should I pay when, if I apply myself, maybe I > could get it for free?” > > Like George Costanza, drivers often compare parking at the curb to > parking in a garage and decide that the price of garage parking is > too high. But the truth is that the price of curb parking is too > low. Underpriced curb spaces are like rent-controlled apartments: > hard to find and, once you do, crazy to give up. This increases the > time costs (and therefore the congestion and pollution costs) of > cruising. > > And, like rent-controlled apartments, underpriced curb spaces go to > the lucky more often than they do to the deserving. While the car > owner with good timing can enjoy his space free or cheaply for > hours or days, others who are late for a meeting or a job interview > are left to circle the block, making themselves — and other drivers > — miserable. The solution is to set the right price for curb parking. > > To prevent shortages, some cities have begun to adjust their meter > rates (using trial and error) to produce about an 85 percent > occupancy rate for curb parking. The prices vary by location and > the time of day. Drivers can usually find a vacant curb space near > their destination, and the search time is zero. Cities can adjust > the price of curb parking in response to demand to keep roughly one > out of every eight spaces vacant throughout the day. Right-priced > curb parking can eliminate cruising. > > The balance between the varying demand for parking and the fixed > supply of curb spaces is the Goldilocks Principle of parking > prices: the price is too high if too many spaces are vacant, and > too low if no spaces are vacant. But when only a few spaces are > vacant, the price is just right, and everyone will see that curb > parking is both well used and readily available. > > Beyond the transportation and environmental benefits, performance- > based prices for curb parking can yield ample revenue. If the city > uses a share of this money for added public services on the metered > streets, residents and local merchants will be more willing to > support charging the right price for curb parking. These funds can > be used to clean and maintain sidewalks, plant trees, improve > lighting, remove graffiti, bury utility wires and provide other > public improvements. Returning the meter revenue generated by a > district to the district can persuade residents, merchants and > property owners to support right-priced curb parking. > > Redwood City, Calif., for example, sets its downtown meter rates to > achieve an 85 percent occupancy rate for curb parking (the rates > vary by location and time of day, depending on demand). Because the > city returns the revenue to pay for added public services in the > metered district, the downtown area will receive an estimated $1 > million a year for increased police protection and cleaner sidewalks. > > The Redwood City merchants and property owners all supported the > new policy when they learned what the meter revenue would help pay > for, and the City Council adopted it unanimously. Performance-based > prices create a few curb vacancies so visitors can easily find a > space, the added revenue pays to improve public services, and the > improved public services create political support for the > performance-based prices. > > If cities want to reduce congestion, clean the air, save energy, > reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve neighborhoods — and do > it all quickly — they should charge the right price for curb > parking, and spend the resulting revenue to improve local public > services. > > Getting that price right will do a world of good. > > ----------- > Donald Shoup, a professor of urban planning at the University of > California, Los Angeles, is the author of “The High Cost of Free > Parking.” > -- > To unsubscribe: > mailto:sympa@lists.riseup.net?subject=unsubscribe%20sfbike > or mailto:sfbike-unsubscribe@lists.riseup.net > > To change your settings (e.g., Digest or NoMail when on vacation): > http://lists.riseup.net/www/info/sfbike >

1 0