>My current thinking is that our highly decentralized transit system is
>mostly a good thing. Not because decentralization is inherently good,
>but because urban transit users constitute a minority in the Bay Area.
Call me a Thatcherite (I would be proud to wear that name, actually) but
I think decentralization is almost always better when the needs of the
public vary from place to place. It's why BART and Muni on the rare GOOD
days do not so badly to get the Western Addition resident to, say, Lake
Merritt. High-density area is served by frequent, cheap trolley coaches
and low-density area is served by a longer-distance vehicle - as it
should be.
I, personally, would like MORE decentralization if it came in the form of
COMPETITION. The reason the above scenario is laughable today is that
there aren't too many good days. This is in no small part because the
monopoly providers of SF bus service and trans-bay subway service can
screw up and largely get away with it. Why? We don't have a similarly
priced choice. When potential users do (take a car) they usually take it.
Imagine the following scenario for a moment. Suppose different lines in
SF and the region (why limit it to our tiny space?) provided service
based on their reading of users' needs. And suppose that they got
"proper" subsidies, or that users were willing to pay a fare that covered
the cost of providing service. They would find, if they did good market
research, that some SF (and regional) users have needs not met by Muni
today, and they would commence such service as soon as they could, and
when they found that users' needs have changed, they would duly modify
such service.
That's it. No lengthy supervisors' meetings, no two-year hiring
processes, no (or fewer) endless community meetings, no union
foot-dragging on seniority-based promotion systems, no mayoral pressure.
And the users would benefit immensely.
Of course this is exactly what happens in the real world. Look at my
industry (telecommunications) for a moment - just compare the choice
users get today, 5 cellular providers, 100s of long distance carriers,
1000s of ISPs (though only one real local carrier as of yet) with the
Bell System. What a difference!
Now the question of how we get to the nirvana above is the big challenge.
But I would say that when the Mayor said we all want SuperShuttle to
come to our door he wasn't too far off. Who could possibly oppose that,
except the entrenched interests who appear to run this city?
Andrew
P.S. Re Donald's point:
>We're paying top dollar, we should get top service. That is not Thatcherism,
>that is common sense.
Maybe, just maybe, it's both!