>27-Bryant goes
>just about exactly where I need it to go, but more
>importantly, it is _extremely_ reliable.
It was graded "A" in 1997 and ungraded (insufficient data) in 1998.
>I've never been in a city where it was so hard to buy a bus
>pass. It's as if MUNI didn't want to sell them.
Well, of course Muni doesn't, since they would make more money (or lose
less) if you paid the cash fare.
It is boneheaded, though. You go into the underground, and there's a
"Charge a Ticket" machine. Can you buy a pass? NO. Does the guy at the
entrance sell you one? NO. If you go to Walgreens after the third of
the month, can you get one? NO. Can you get passes by mail? NO. Maybe
it's Muni's limited marketing budget, maybe it's because they don't pay
very much (.25) to vendors, but it's still a drag.
Donald wrote:
>> p.s. Note new email address: andrew@sulli.org.
>
>Does this mean that you're a contractor again?
No, unfortunately. Just found a domain name I liked and took it.
>The last thing this city
>needs is to be encouraging more drivers by adding parking
>spaces.
Amen! How do we get rid of this suburbanite rule?
William wrote:
>Andrew Sullivan (and, apparently, many others - witness local rent control
>ordinances and the Rent Control Board) seem to be certain that as Americans
>we have a right to live anywhere we want.
On the contrary, I have been arguing pretty forcefully for free-market
solutions to problems like the housing shortage (and Muni, for that
matter). I actively chose to live in SF, dealt with a nasty housing
market due almost entirely to rent control, and am advocating here
sufficient development to meet the demand for housing that SF's famous
livability generates.
Howard wrote:
>Perhaps live work residents will have to
>accept manufacturing noise forever.
Yes. That is part of the deal. If you don't like noise, don't live in a
mostly industrial / commercial neighborhood. The 11th street neighbors
were out of their minds.
Tom wrote:
>In essence, privatizing Muni means breaking the Transport Workers Union.
>I don't think any riders' group should advocate this. I think it is
>better to develop a cooperative relationship between the riders
>and the workforce. Management decisions that have caused fiascos
>at Muni haven't been made by the drivers and mechanics.
Well ... I don't have a problem with paying drivers well (though the
current rule, set in the city charter, that pays drivers the average of
the top two systems in the nation seems excessive) - but I do think that
too-strong unions can be a serious problem. Today, it is very difficult
to establish real accountability, or pay for performance, due to union
opposition. As a taxpayer and a customer, I can't say I like that.
I would suggest that wages aren't the issue. COMPETITION is. Having
multiple providers compete to provide service, either directly to the
end-user or to Muni as buyer, lets us CHOOSE based on real-world measures
like reliability, safety, and efficiency. I think that is entirely
appropriate. Right now, if we don't like Muni, we're stuck.
A
s u l l i . o r g
ANDREW SULLIVAN
NEW email: andrew@sulli.org
NEW web: www.sulli.org
SAME physical address: 1668 Grove St, SF CA 94117
Phone: 415 673 0626