Oh my, I’m guessing maintenance for this high-maintenance V12 monster (which cost, I’m guessing here, and let’s throw in license and reg and whatnot, NORTH OF FREAKING $130K, back in the aughts) costs more than rent:
Imagine that in San Francisco…
[UPDATE: I’ve omitted Stanley Roberts’ video from this post as I mistakenly thought it was new as of this week when in fact it was posted almost two years old now. My apologies, Stanley. As you can see, Mr. Roberts goes after everybody (including fake monks and nuns) and certain people at the SFBC have been irritated by that over the years.]
Our San Francisco Bicycle Coalition has lost thousands of paid members lately.
Now part of that’s due to “churn,” which is something that every organization has to deal with, but most of it has to do with behavior of the SFBC itself. I’ll tell you, I’ve been riding bikes around town longer than the current SFBC has existed – no, I’m not saying that I’ve been here since the “early 70’s,” I’m saying that the SFBC didn’t really exist in the 1980’s when I came to SF. I’m saying that before Critical Mass (and its predecessor, the “Commute Clot”), the SFBC didn’t really exist – they were nowhere, man. What _did_ exist, a little later on, was the car-centric Willie Brown Administration. And all those functionaries working for Willie Brown were trying to find some “bicycle people” to cut a deal with, to tame Critical Mass, to give grant money to. But no, all the Critical Mass leaders were saying stuff like, “Critical Mass doesn’t have leaders, Man.” Eventually, the SFBC managed to practically become a part of the SFMTA, you know, conducting surveys for SFGov, receiving hundreds of thousands of dollars per year in taxpayer and feepayer money, forcing companies like Twitter to deal with the SFBC, you know, officially, and, in return, the SFBC stopped promoting Critical Mass, and SFBC now offers pols a nice photo op every year on Bike to Work Day and it actually endorses (without consulting the Members at all) for election Willie Brown protegees like, I don’t know, Ed Lee, for example. So that’s the history, and during this history I’ve seen the SFBC grow in membership, from “over 1000″ to “over 5000″ to “over “10,000” and then “over 11,000″ and then “over 12,000″ and then, uh oh, back down to “over 11,000″ and most recently back down to “over 10,000.” What are the numbers now? IDK, 9000-something? The SFBC isn’t exactly candid about its recent loss in membership. The SFBC certainly doesn’t want people freely looking at its tax forms or its older webpages, so that’s why it recently started suppressing this kind of information. Mmmmm… I’ll tell you, of course, there’s been a huge increase in bicycling in San Francisco since I’ve come here, and for various reasons, fine. (It’s sort of funny about how the big annual jumps in cycling came exactly during the rise of the fixie craze, and exactly when the Bicycle Plan injunction froze all infrastructure changes, but whatevs.) I’ll ask you, why can’t a monomaniacal advocacy organization like the SFBC concede anything? I guarantee you that the SFBC people who went the extra mile to “reach out” to Stanley Roberts of KRON-TV are pissed off about the above video coming out right before the Big Vote on Polk Street, which is supposably [what, no red underlining for a word I purposefully misspelled? Amazing] coming March 3rd, 2015, but who knows how that will work out. I’ll tell you, IMO Polk Street is a triple beam lyrical dream the way it is now. What are the other options to go north south in the area? If I don’t take Polk, then I’d be thinking Stockton, Grant, Kearney or the Embarcadero to the east or, to the west, Steiner (it’s sort of the pass over Pacific Heights, sort of) or Arguello through the Presidio. In your efforts to pursue your goals, SFBC, which I don’t necessarily oppose, you go too far and you end up alienating people like me, a man in his 40’s, and even older people such as Junior the Bike Messenger, and, apparently, THOUSANDS OF OTHER FORMER SFBC MEMBERS.
The question is, WHY IS THAT, SFBC?
Perversely, the less efficient our dull-witted SFMTA becomes, the more money it gets. Case in point is the new Area Q Residential Parking Permit area for the NoPA / Alamo Square part of the Western Addition – the MTA will approve its establishment on March 3rd, 2015.
It’ll go a little something like this:
Supposedly, the SFMTA doesn’t care about this issue, since it’s “revenue-neutral” for it, but IRL, the SFMTA just loves this idea. The SFMTA wants to “manage” more and more and more always always always, despite its demonstrated incompetence at performing its core function, which is moving people around.
SFMTA “work rules” make the SFMTA inefficient. (I wonder if they have a list of all these rules.) So the less efficient it becomes, the more money it gets, perversely, in annual RPP revenue. (If the SFMTA operated a McDonalds, a Big Mac would cost $20 and take a half-hour to prepare, cause you know, cost-plus pricing, and you know, “work rules.”)
Anyway, the SFMTA wants to makes things easier for certain people to keep cars on the streets of San Francisco, so that’s a big clue on how it’ll vote come March.
What it actually wants is an annual household SFMTA tax levied on everybody, but this will have to do until that time comes…
This was at least the second attempt:
Transportation in San Francisco certainly can be a hassle for newcomers, and the Euro Airbnbers, well, they’re like super newcomers, they’re fish out of water in SF’s low-rise western suburbs.
But they’re probably better off here in the Western Addition than in pricey Union Square or less-pricey, bedbug-ridden “Near Union Square.”
If I were the Super Pretzel pushcart people on Market at the cable car turnaround, I’d push these carts somewhere else before the lengthy loading and unloading process:
But these people don’t care – on they go with lifting and the lowering, on they go as westbound traffic backs up behind them…