Dude’s everywhere these days:
I guess his goal now at this point is to surpass the 206 electoral votes that Romney got in 2012 – that would be a sort of a victory…
Look at all this stuff our SFCTA was going to do:
Note “Roadway redesign – mid 2016”
Well guess what – the SFCTA / SFMTA recently caved, so the Bridge Over The River Geary will remain at Webster.
So all these meetings were a big success, or a huge failure for the SFCTA, depending on how you look at it.
And look at all the Haterade that the SFCTA poured over the pedestrian bridges of Geary – and this is just 20% of the references made:
In the Japantown and Fillmore areas, there are closed crosswalks and circuitous pedestrian bridges that are not compliant with accessibility standards for people with disabilities.
In the Japantown area, as depicted in Figure 1-6, some aspects that discourage pedestrian movement and activity include narrow medians and circuitous pedestrian bridges that intimidate some and are not compliant with accessibility standards for people with disabilities.
Spanning Geary Boulevard are two pedestrian bridges at the Webster Street and Steiner Street intersections, where closed crosswalks limit pedestrians‟ ability to cross Geary Boulevard at ground level. These overcrossings are several decades old and, although they provide separation from traffic, are often perceived as an inconvenient way of crossing Geary Boulevard due to the long and indirect ramps, change in elevation required, and some users‟ sense of insecurity. Additionally, the pedestrian overcrossings are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), hindering the mobility of people with disabilities.
Pedestrian bridges at Steiner Street and Webster Street: These two pedestrian overcrossings would be removed, to eliminate conflicts between these structures‟ piers and the proposed bus lanes, as well as to provide new pedestrian crossings at street grade.
Two pedestrian bridges span Geary Boulevard at the Webster Street and Steiner Street intersections. The grade-separated walkways allow pedestrians to cross over Geary Boulevard. These overcrossings are several decades old and are perceived as an inconvenient way of crossing due to the long and indirect ramps, change in elevation required, and some users’ sense of insecurity. Additionally, the pedestrian overcrossings are not compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) due to their average inclines exceeding the ADA standard of a five percent maximum grade (i.e. a slope increasing in elevation by five feet for every 100 feet in length), which makes wheelchair crossings difficult.
Like I said, this is just 20% of the vitriol our SFCTA spewed upon these two bridges in just one document. I get the feeling these SFCTA people would say just about anything to get nine figures from the Feds. I mean if the Feds would give the SFCTA $100,000,000 to recommend keeping everything on Geary EXACTLY THE SAME FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS, then I’ll bet the we would have gotten a document what extols the virtues of these bridges.
Anyway, the Webster bridge is staying, that’s the news.
I don’t know if it was such a great idea to build these bridges and I also don’t know if it’s such a great idea to spend big big bucks to tear them down…
Here’s the latest on this issue, from the SFCTA, below.
If our SFCTA wanted to handle this issue with the least possible effort, then I give it an A+, or a passing grade if we’re grading pass/fail. Another approach would have been to notice another meeting and yada yada.
This project has been on the radar for a long, long time, but I never really paid attention to it until the pedestrian bridges issue came up. If the SFCTA were a person and we took what it said seriously, I’d tell you that our SFCTA is in deep denial on this bridges issue.
(And how much would a BART spur under Geary end up costing, like a billion dollars a mile, like our already-failed Central Subway? Is something like this unreachable pie in the sky? IDK.)
Anyway, here it is:
Here you go, click here and then Control-F for the phrase pedestrian bridge – 26 mentions you will find.
Can you see anything positive at all mentioned about the bridges of J-Town? Perhaps our SFCTA doesn’t think there are any? Or perhaps it thinks it’s writing an advocacy document and so it feels free to lie? IDK.
There were about a dozen people on the bridge when this photo was taken – they’re hard to spot:
And if these bridges aren’t up to standards, well, then why hasn’t anybody sued us over accessibility? Perhaps they are up to standards?
And oh yes, DEAR SFCTA – YOUR QUICK AND DIRTY GEARY BRT PROJECT AIN’T TOO QUICK, NOW, IS IT?
Is this the box what got swiped from the basement of St. Mary’s the other day?
I think it is!
(That’s what some railfan/urbanist/Googler told me, and this particular demographic has ne’er lied to me yet.)
And what’s that, the whole point of this meeting was primarily to be able to tell the FTA that we had a meeting so give us some money money money?
“As the San Francisco Examiner reported, Geary BRT is jockeying for a $75 million grant from the Federal Transit Administration’s Small Starts fund, which may be awarded after public input is taken on the draft environmental impact report.”
And this drive for money is what fuels the SFMTA’s rabid hatred of the pedestrian bridges in the Japantown area on Geary?
Oh, I see!
Gentle Reader, check out any EIR, draft or whatever, then control-F for “pedestrian bridge” and then brace for the haterade. Shouldn’t an EIR, draft or whatever, outline the pros and cons of destroying the ped bridges? And hey, does the SFCTA want to tear down all structures in town what aren’t 100% ADA compliant right now? Oh, no, just these bridges?
(I should say that the SFCTA is already on secret double probation for the disastrous Central Subway and the failing T-Third, among other crimes and misdemeanors.)
On It Goes.
Will the Geary BRT be a good thing? IDK. But certainly, the honest answer to this question won’t come from our SFCTA. (Perhaps we should pay them $75 million to recommend doing nothing and then we’d be better off, IDK. )
From the SF Bay Area Observer comes the news that journalists at The Bay Citizen will affiliate with the Pacific Media Workers Guild, Local 39521 of The Newspaper Guild-Communications Workers of America.
Perhaps things aren’t all locked down yet, but the MWG was confident enough to issue a press release this AM, so that’s good enough for me.
All the deets, below.
“Bay Citizen becomes first start-up news website to organize. New model in journalism leads way in workplace democracy
20 Jul 2011
New model in journalism leads way in workplace democracy
San Francisco, July 20, 2011 – Journalists at the nonprofit news website The Bay Citizen have voted to affiliate with the Pacific Media Workers Guild, Local 39521 of The Newspaper Guild-Communications Workers of America.
“We believe The Bay Citizen, as one of the pioneering exponents of new civic journalism, should also be a leading example in the area of workplace democracy,” The Bay Citizen’s editorial staff wrote in a letter to TBC President and CEO Lisa Frazier ahead of filing cards with the National Labor Relations Board.
The majority of the organization’s editorial staff signed union cards seeking to be represented by the Guild on May 26th, the one-year anniversary of The Bay Citizen’s launch. Voting was conducted June 27 at The Bay Citizen’s San Francisco headquarters and by mail-in ballot. NLRB officials counted the votes on Tuesday, July 12.
Two votes out of the 14 cast are being challenged. The remaining ballot count resulted in a 7-5 win to form the union. The two challenged votes have not been opened, however the Guild is certain that whether these two voters are included in the unit or not, the concluding tally will remain in favor of forming a unit. The Guild is asking the NLRB to count all votes cast.
Bernie Lunzer, international president of The Newspaper Guild in Washington, D.C., said the result marks an historic advance for media workers, as traditional newsrooms shrink and the industry struggles to find new models to stay competitive in the online era.
“The future of quality journalism depends on reporters and editors shaping the vision of innovative new media organizations. By voting to be represented by the Guild, employees at The Bay Citizen have given themselves this voice,” Lunzer said.
Support came from unionized journalists at The New York Times and KGO radio, which have agreements to obtain local news content from The Bay Citizen.
“For more than a year, journalists from The Bay Citizen have provided important coverage for the pages and website of The New York Times, and these talented journalists are an asset to the Guild at an important time, ” wrote Grant Glickson, New York Times Staff Assistant and Unit Chairperson.
Bay Citizen staff members are committed to the success of the organization and expect their new Guild unit to work in partnership with management to create a contract appropriate for their nonprofit startup.
The Bay Citizen was founded in 2010 as a nonprofit, nonpartisan news organization dedicated to fact-based, independent reporting on civic and community issues in the San Francisco Bay Area. Its newsroom of award-winning journalists covers Bay Area civic and cultural news topics that are under-reported today. TBC also partners widely with independent media organizations and produces the Bay Area pages of the The New York Times.
The Bay Citizen unit joins one of the premier affiliates of TNG-CWA. Formed after a series of recent mergers, the San Francisco-based Pacific Media Workers Guild (known as the California Media Workers Guild until a name change in January) represents about 2,000 news workers, freelancers, court interpreters and union staffs throughout California and Hawaii. News units include the San Francisco Chronicle, San Jose Mercury News, Bay Area News Group-East Bay, Bay City News Service, Santa Rosa Press Democrat, Sacramento Bee, Fresno Bee, Modesto Bee, Honolulu Star-Advertiser, Hawaii Herald-Tribune and Maui News. The Guild also includes the California Federation of Interpreters, print shops and union staffs at AFSCME Local 3299, the ILWU and California Labor Federation.”
I’ve told you before, taxi drivers, and I’ll say it again.
If you want to get healthcare and if you want local govt. to take you seriously, become a MUNI driver.
Anyway, the latest deets are below.
One of the group of San Francisco taxi drivers who isn’t afraid of a little protest, obviously. She has three kids and she’s from Brazil – maybe she’ll be at the big meeting:
Click to expand
Do I think it’s remotely possible that the bulk of a shift of taxi drivers will go on strike? No.
Do I think it’s probable that MUNI drivers will go on strike on August 2? Also no.
Anyway, the latest:
SF Transit Operator/Taxi Drivers Organizing Meeting August 1st
An open meeting is scheduled for Monday, August 1st, 2011 from 6pm to 9pm, between San Francisco taxi drivers and MUNI bus workers. (Everyone is welcome)
These meetings are to strengthen relations between the taxi workers and bus workers, and to envision a more united and organized public transit worker front. Taxi drivers of late have been protesting 5% credit card fees, rear seat payment terminals, and electronic waybill tracking.
Some MUNI and TAXI workers have voiced OSHA health and safety complaints. They are also protesting Proposition G, which is said to prevent workers from negotiating on their work conditions.
The MTA has recently approved a $233 million contract towards its controversial $1.6 billion project to begin tunneling under Chinatown. Meanwhile, taxi workers and MUNI workers are seeking to combine their efforts to not be forgotten and fight for their rights and demand to have what’s theirs.
WHEN: Monday, August 1st, 2011 from 6pm to 9pm.
WHERE: 201 Turk St. between Jones and Leavenworth.”
Well looky here, looks like we’re in for a good old-fashioned taxi driver protest at City Hall today at noon. It seems some of our hacks are upset about having to pay some credit card fee, more or less. There are other issues as well, see below.
(Hey cabbies, why don’t you just try to become MUNI drivers? They’re always hiring, right? You’ll end up with health care and a bunch more money in the end, right? Just saying. Oh, since you’re not going to listen to me and I’m already telling you what to do, why not get a free Wordpress and post your issues up there? It’ll take like two minutes to get started. Just saying…)
Last time I was at a City Hall taxi protest, it was taken over by this driver, a mother of three from Brazil:
Click to expand
All the deets:
“Tariq, a cab driver for many years is organizing a protest at City Hall on Tuesday May 3rd. Expected are over 100 drivers at this protest – meet us on the Polk street side of city hall at 12:00 noon.”
“PROTEST Tuesday May 3rd, 12 PM, City Hall, room 400
SHOW UP EVEN IF YOU COULD MAKE $100,000 IN THAT 2-3 HOURS
SAY: NO %5.
SAY WE CAN PAY LESS THAN HALF TO ROCESS CREDIT/DEBIT CARD.
SAY: IF DRIVERS ARE SELF-EMPLOYED, RUNNING THEIR OWN BUSINESS, THEN THEY SHOULD CHOOSE THEIR OWN SERVICE PROVIDER.
SAY: NO GPS ELECTORNIC WAYBILL.
SAY: IF SFMTA WANTS TO TREAT US LIKE AN EMPLOYEE, THEN THEY SHOULD PAY US LIKE MUNI DRIVERS.
SAY: SFMTA CAN NOT HAVE IT BOTH WAYS.
SAY: NO STORAGE OF PERSONAL INFORMATION (DRIVER OR PASSENGER).
SAY: IT HAS BEEN PROVEN THAT PERSONAL INFORMATION HAS, AND CAN BE, BROKEN INTO.
SAY: HOW MUCH, PER HOUR, IT COSTS SFMTA TO PAY AN ENTRY-LEVEL MUNI DRIVER?
SAY: THE FIRST $15 OF EVERY HOUR IS NOT OURS. SAY: WITH THE LEFT OVER WE PAY FOR TICKET, ASSAULT, ACCIDENT, RETIREMENT, MEDICAL, SICK-LEAVE AND MORE.
SAY: COMPARE THIS LEFT OVER WITH YOUR COST FOR AN ENTRY-LEVEL MUNI DRIVER.
SAY: SOME OF US ARE DRIVING MORE THAN 20 YEARS. SAY: WE DO NOT DESERVE THIS.
CABBIES HELPING CABBIES (C.H.C.)”
Bon Courage, hacks!