District 5 Diary
Rob Anderson's commentary on San Francisco politics from District 5
Sunday, August 02, 2015
Saturday, August 01, 2015
Something to celebrate: 50 years of Medicare and Medicaid
Friday, July 31, 2015
To ticket or not to ticket
|Ed Reiskin, London Breed, Noah Budnick|
Sorting out the sense from the nonsense in the ticketing cyclists kerfuffle, I have to admit that a comment to Streetsblog last year by Upright Biker stated the issue succinctly:
Yes, well put. But if the city is really concerned about pedestrian safety on places like the Wiggle and the north path of the Panhandle, it should put city cops there to ticket cyclists who actually endanger pedestrians.
Ticketing cyclists for rolling through stop signs when there's no danger from motorists or to pedestrians may be legally correct, but you quickly get into Javert/Les Miserables territory if you insist on rigidly enforcing the letter of the law.
On the other hand, it's hard to protect cyclists from themselves if they engage in risky behavior. Recall that the three cyclists who died on city streets last year did so because of their own negligent behavior. Ditto for 50% of the city's 2014 pedestrian fatalities.
Recall too that most cycling accidents are "solo falls" that don't involve other vehicles, and that those accidents can be just as serious as being hit by a motor vehicle.
In the beginning of his regime, Mayor Lee probably thought that supporting whatever the bike lobby wants to do to city streets was a safe political move, but the apparent growing unpopularity of the city's bike people is giving him second thoughts.
With their unerring sense of bad PR, cyclists jam up traffic on the Wiggle to only confirm for the rest of us that, yes, a lot of cyclists are buttholes.
|Streetsblog thinks this is cool|
PBS Newshour gets "airy" new look
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Answering a call to prayer
|Working on a cure|
The city and the Lower Haight: Stuck with the Wiggle
Wednesday, July 29, 2015
"The arena needs to be located elsewhere"
The arena needs to be located elsewhere.
Tuesday, July 28, 2015
Dr. Seuss: Radical environmentalist
|“I am the Lorax. I speak for the trees. |
I speak for the trees for the trees have no tongues.”
From a Laytonville resident's newsletter at the time:
Monday, July 27, 2015
"Rough ride" on city roads
New Warriors' arena will create gridlock
That darn CEQA strikes again, even though just the other day Planetizen all but announced the impending success of CEQA "reform," which will mean that creating traffic congestion will no longer be an environmental impact. Maybe those 18,000 basketball fans, concert goers, and those attending the 60+ other special events will ride bikes to the new arena.
Bogus case against GMOs
Sunday, July 26, 2015
Sam Harris: Religious moderates "blinded by their own moderation"
City Hall on the Wiggle: Having it both ways
|A Wiggle sign|
Saturday, July 25, 2015
Risky behavior putting bicyclists in ER
Labels: Cycling and Safety
Wall Street reform is working
Friday, July 24, 2015
Zombie falsehood about Bicycle Plan shambles on
|Bay Area Council in action in Washington|
It was an easy decision for Judge Busch to make.
Wednesday, July 22, 2015
Examiner readers support crackdown on scofflaw cyclists
Flight MH370: Still missing
People driving more than ever
|From Calculated Risk|
Tuesday, July 21, 2015
Planetizen tries to rewrite city history
Labels: Cycling and Safety
Monday, July 20, 2015
Elizabeth Warren talks to Netroots
Cap-and-trade and the high-speed rail project
|"An additional $21 billion will need to be identified |
to complete the IOS[initial operating segment]
which is about two-thirds of the total cost."
This is because, as mentioned above, plans for the high-speed rail system indicate that the first phase of the project will not be operational until 2022. Second, the construction of the project would actually generate GHG emissions of 30,000 metric tons over the next several years. (The HSRA plans to offset these emissions with an urban forestry program that proposes to plant thousands of trees in the Central Valley.)
We also note that HSRA’s GHG emission estimates for construction do not include emissions associated with the production of construction materials, which suggests that the amount of emission requiring mitigation could be much higher than currently planned.
An infusion of funds from the private sector to address the current IOS funding shortfall is unlikely, given that the HSRA stated in its 2012 business plan that private sector funds will only become available after the IOS is completed and demonstrated to have a net positive operating cash flow.
Additionally, given the federal government’s current financial situation, the current focus in Washington on reducing federal spending, and the lack of a federal budget appropriation to support the state’s high-speed rail system since 2009-10, it is uncertain at this time that any additional federal funding for the state’s high-speed rail project will become available. Thus, the state will likely be the only source of additional funding to address the $21 billion shortfall identified by HSRA.
At this time, however, the administration has not provided an estimate of projected cap-and-trade auction revenues. Moreover, it is unclear for how long the administration expects there to be cap-and-trade auctions and the availability of revenue resulting from such auctions.
The absence of a detailed plan projecting the estimated amount of cap-and-trade auction revenue that would be appropriated to HSRA by year is problematic for two reasons.
First, it makes it difficult for the Legislature to determine if such revenues, along with available federal funds and Proposition 1A bond funds, would be sufficient to fund the expected costs per year to complete the IOS. To the extent that there would not be sufficient revenues in a given year, the Legislature would need to identify alternative funding sources, likely from other state resources.
Second, the absence of projected cap-and-trade auction revenues also makes it difficult for the Legislature to weigh the relative trade-offs of dedicating a fixed percentage of cap-and-trade auction revenues to high-speed rail each year (without further legislative action) versus allocating the funds on an annual basis to other programs intended to reduce GHG emissions, including programs that the Legislature deems to be of higher priority and could maximize GHG reductions in a more cost-effective manner. This is because it is uncertain whether there would be a sufficient amount of funding available under the Governor’s proposal to support such programs.
HSRA Expending Federal Funds While Matching Proposition 1A Bond Funds Face Legal Risks.
For the remainder of 2013-14 and 2014-15, the HSRA plans to spend about $1.6 billion in federal funds on the high-speed rail project, which require a match of state funds.
Currently, the only state funding source available to provide matching expenditures are Proposition 1A bond funds. However, as we mentioned above, the availability of Proposition 1A bond funds has been the subject of litigation. If the federal funds are expended as planned, and the state does not provide matching expenditures, the Federal Railways Administration reserves the right to require that the state repay the federal government up to the entire amount of federal funds spent on the project.
In light of the concerns expressed above, we make several recommendations intended to help the Legislature ensure that the high-speed rail project can be completed as planned, while balancing other priorities such as maximizing GHG emission reductions.
Specifically, we recommend:
• Requiring Administration to Provide Complete Funding Plan. Given the concerns described above, we recommend that the Legislature require the administration and HSRA to provide a funding plan that identifies all the funding sources (including cap-and-trade auction revenues) by amount and year that would be used to complete the IOS. As such, the plan should detail how the administration intends to address the $21 billion shortfall identified by HSRA. The requested funding plan would help the Legislature in its deliberations on the Governor’s funding proposals for high-speed rail.
• Withholding Action on Various Proposals. Pending the receipt of the above funding plan, we recommend that the Legislature withhold action on the Governor’s high-speed rail proposals (including those proposed for CPUC and DOC).
• Weighing Options for Use of Cap-And-Trade Auction Revenue. As we recommended in our recent report on the administration’s cap-and-trade auction revenue expenditure plan, we recommend that the Legislature consider a full array of options for the use of cap-and-trade auction revenue funds to help achieve the goals of AB 32 and meet legislative priorities...(emphasis added)
Citizens for California High-Speed Rail Accountability: A letter to the Air Resources Board on cap-and-trade and the high-speed rail project.
Kathy Hamilton's latest at CalWatchdog.com on the cap-and-trade issue.