Posts Tagged ‘untility’

The 5th Anniversary of the SFMTA’s Proposed “Transportation Utility Fee” – Or, Why the SFMTA Doesn’t Feel Sorry for You After Towing Your Car

Wednesday, February 10th, 2016

Here you go:

Why is Towing So Expensive in San Francisco? By Farida Jhabvala – KQED News

And here’s the gritty nitty:

Captureljlj

See that? San Francisco County charges more than anybody. Why? Because it can.

And actually, it thinks you’re the deadbeat – I’ll explain.

What the SFMTA really wants is a steady supply of unlimited money, so that it doesn’t have to do anything it doesn’t want to, so that it can continue to hire and spend and hire and spend regardless of how it performs. The way to do that is to charge you hundreds of dollars a year, whether or not you ever ride on MUNI and even if you never violate any of the SFMTA’s parking rules.

The mechanism is called the “Transportation Utility Fee,” as described by Will Reisman here.

Of course, back then they were talking about $180 per year, but now we’ve got to pay for our share of the Central Subway (To Nowhere, still) and ever increasing overhead, so I think we’re talking about $250 per year with a built-in increase of like 10%, or, better yet, 9.9%.

I’m not saying we’re going to see the TUF soon, or ever, actually. What I’m saying is that this is what the SFMTA people think they deserve for being the all-knowing, all-seeing bureaucracy it thinks it is.

So if you complain about getting towed, our City Family thinks, “Well, gee, we should probably be towing you EVERY YEAR.” You know, so the SFMTA can get more money, for free.

So that’s why the SFMTA Doesn’t Feel Sorry for You After Towing Your Car and charging you the highest administrative towing fee of all of America’s 3000-something counties…

Is PG&E Money Going to Google so that Web Searches for “Janet Reilly” Send People to “Not Janet Reilly.com?”

Friday, October 22nd, 2010

[UPDATE: Well, no, it seems. See Byron’s comment. A mystery solved. But I got to tell you that a unique ID number would solve this problem. That way, we could all invoke Thomas Paine without confusion…]

Get up to speed on the whole NotJanetReilly.com issue right here.

Now, who’s paying Google to send searchers to Not Janet Reilly, a tiny website that would get no attention but for a Google “Sponsored Link?”

Oh, it’s Common Sense Voters, SF 2010?” But who are they?

Are they “CommonSenseSF” and/or the “Coalition for Reliable and Affordable Electricity and/or PG&E?”

Don’t know. But the big beef against Janet at NotJanetReilly appears to be the whole Public Power / Community Choice Aggregation issue, one that PG&E would seem to have an interest in. See?

Now, I’m not surprised to hear that District 2 rejected Public Power in the past, but I wonder:

Who would win a popularity contest in D2 right now – Janet Reilly or PG&E?

That’d be something for some area Pigs Giraffes & Elephants(who haven’t been having a good year, to say the least) to consider, mmmm?