Comments on: Rescue Muni opposes $5 F-Market fare, supports parking meter increases http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/ A transit riders' association for San Francisco Tue, 31 Jan 2012 18:02:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4 By: Rescue Muni » Blog Archive » Comment on proposed service cuts TODAY, 6 pm http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5511 Rescue Muni » Blog Archive » Comment on proposed service cuts TODAY, 6 pm Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:54:07 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5511 [...] hours (including enforcing meters on Sundays) are far better than cutting mass transit, and that charging extra for the F line and expresses is a terrible idea? If so, please attend and comment at this SFMTA public [...] [...] hours (including enforcing meters on Sundays) are far better than cutting mass transit, and that charging extra for the F line and expresses is a terrible idea? If so, please attend and comment at this SFMTA public [...]

]]> By: goodmaab http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5509 goodmaab Mon, 08 Feb 2010 23:55:35 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5509 The F-Line and Cable Car are still "TRANSIT" routes in the city, and regardless of the number of tourists or the dollars they are willing to throw, they must be made available to residents and riders of muni. To cut access, is similar to cutting ammenities, and is a loss-of-use to riders currently. If this is pushed forward, than riders should submit a "loss-of-use" clause legal suit, and force it back the other way. The ability to "ENJOY" what SF has in terms of transit should not be sold to the "highest" bidder. The systems should remain public transit, and expanded if possible to allow max. use and future development of these lines. The best next step is all the way out to the Presidio new environmental center right along the marina green. Public Access to Public Ammenities.... along the old 1915 Pan American Exhibition Line.... Thats public transit and access to public ammenities.... The F-Line and Cable Car are still “TRANSIT” routes in the city, and regardless of the number of tourists or the dollars they are willing to throw, they must be made available to residents and riders of muni. To cut access, is similar to cutting ammenities, and is a loss-of-use to riders currently. If this is pushed forward, than riders should submit a “loss-of-use” clause legal suit, and force it back the other way. The ability to “ENJOY” what SF has in terms of transit should not be sold to the “highest” bidder. The systems should remain public transit, and expanded if possible to allow max. use and future development of these lines. The best next step is all the way out to the Presidio new environmental center right along the marina green. Public Access to Public Ammenities…. along the old 1915 Pan American Exhibition Line…. Thats public transit and access to public ammenities….

]]> By: Seven http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5409 Seven Sun, 31 Jan 2010 19:43:33 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5409 This feels like an MTA trial balloon to see how the public would respond to a $5 fare systemwide. This feels like an MTA trial balloon to see how the public would respond to a $5 fare systemwide.

]]> By: Don http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5319 Don Mon, 25 Jan 2010 06:13:13 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5319 If the objection to raising the fare on the F line is because on occasion the metro melts down, that objection is specious. Most places along Market there are busses. And most of those who regularly ride the metro probably have some kind of pass anyway. Could there be other reasons for objecting to fare increases? If Muni can make money off the F line, and that revenue can help improve Muni then Rescue Muni should not object. There may be other sources of revenue but going after those who must drive is not a good solution. That is not a bottomless pot of money. I agree Muni is not working. But even when money is there it does not work. It may be time to look for alternative ways to meet transportation needs? If the objection to raising the fare on the F line is because on occasion the metro melts down, that objection is specious. Most places along Market there are busses. And most of those who regularly ride the metro probably have some kind of pass anyway. Could there be other reasons for objecting to fare increases? If Muni can make money off the F line, and that revenue can help improve Muni then Rescue Muni should not object.

There may be other sources of revenue but going after those who must drive is not a good solution. That is not a bottomless pot of money. I agree Muni is not working. But even when money is there it does not work. It may be time to look for alternative ways to meet transportation needs?

]]> By: sf4fun66 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5281 sf4fun66 Thu, 21 Jan 2010 00:18:24 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5281 Let's be real...there is NO express service in the city. Nat and his cronies are targeting the F line because of its success. However, its success is based on tourist dollars, not local, commuter dollars. The only time commuters use the F line is when the Market St. Subway implodes. For those who don't hold a monthly pass, the subway disruption should not force them to fork over $5. Transportation in this city sucks and always will suck. Can't wait for the Central Subway to bring additional infrastructure and operational costs and jack up the fare once again. Transit First is quickly becoming Drive First. Let’s be real…there is NO express service in the city.

Nat and his cronies are targeting the F line because of its success. However, its success is based on tourist dollars, not local, commuter dollars. The only time commuters use the F line is when the Market St. Subway implodes. For those who don’t hold a monthly pass, the subway disruption should not force them to fork over $5.

Transportation in this city sucks and always will suck. Can’t wait for the Central Subway to bring additional infrastructure and operational costs and jack up the fare once again. Transit First is quickly becoming Drive First.

]]> By: david vartanoff http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5274 david vartanoff Wed, 20 Jan 2010 17:41:17 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5274 Meanwhile on the street. Tuesday PM between missing drivers and unfit for service coaches TWELVE 14,14L,49's were not out on Mission in rush. The fact that Ford and the MTA Board are still talking about further cuts make clear SLASH transit first. Meanwhile on the street. Tuesday PM between missing drivers and unfit for service coaches TWELVE 14,14L,49′s were not out on Mission in rush. The fact that Ford and the MTA Board are still talking about further cuts make clear SLASH transit first.

]]> By: Don http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5272 Don Wed, 20 Jan 2010 00:06:52 +0000 http://www.rescuemuni.org/2010/01/19/rescue-muni-opposes-5-f-market-fare-supports-parking-meter-increases/#comment-5272 I don’t see any problem for charging more for premium services such as express busses or limit-stop service. If it is more efficient and cost less to operate, that means more money for Muni to improve overall service. Improving service is the goal is it not? It may be true that some will choose a slower ride to save money. But that is their choice and it will make a more comfortable ride for those willing to pay. Comfortable, fast, and safe could also get more people out of their cars. Those who take the F-line have alternatives that may be faster. I don’t see anything “unfair” about charging more for the ambiance. Objecting to the bonus is reasonable. If Muni had competition we could have better service and a bonus would be justified. I also agree that Sunday parking meters make sense in some commercial districts where free parkers make it more difficult for shoppers to use their cars. I don’t see any problem for charging more for premium services such as express busses or limit-stop service. If it is more efficient and cost less to operate, that means more money for Muni to improve overall service. Improving service is the goal is it not?

It may be true that some will choose a slower ride to save money. But that is their choice and it will make a more comfortable ride for those willing to pay. Comfortable, fast, and safe could also get more people out of their cars.

Those who take the F-line have alternatives that may be faster. I don’t see anything “unfair” about charging more for the ambiance.

Objecting to the bonus is reasonable. If Muni had competition we could have better service and a bonus would be justified.

I also agree that Sunday parking meters make sense in some commercial districts where free parkers make it more difficult for shoppers to use their cars.

]]>