It *is* interesting that they seem to be reaching out to SPUR-RescueMUNI.
Pretty obvious really, if they can get a consensus it will look even better
for the Mayor. I wish I was more enthusiastic about the RescueMUNI-Spur
proposal then this would seem more of an opportunity. I suspect that if
RescueMUNI wanted to it could get its service standards substantially into
the Mayor's initiative if we wanted.
(I was NOT happy to see the RescueMUNI-SPUR proposal presented as
basically anti-labor in the media. Those of you who think that our
initiative is a slam-dunk might want to consider that.)
I would like to toss one left field idea back in. I would still like to
see a per-rider or per-fare subsidy from the City for MUNI. I know that most
RescueMUNI people oppose this because they fear a downward spiral (lower
ridership - less $ - less service - lower ridership - repeat) but given our
current situations I think it is well worth the risk. Keeping the fixed
annual subsidy is the tool that the political class uses to keep control of
transit. It makes it very clear to the MUNI management that theirs is a
political job and that problems they have are political problems. They do
not have to provide transit to get their subsidy from the city, they need to
provide an image and services to the political establishment that allows it
to maintain itself. The Mayor's taskforce report is a crystal clear
demonstration of this. The per-rider subsidy breaks this management goal and
replaces it with an incentive to provide transit service.