SF Gate reports that Sara Shortt, the director of the Housing Rights Committee and a Mission resident, and SEIU Local 1021 and the Harvel Milk LGBT Democratic Club are challenging the MTA’s decision to allow the buses to use Muni bus stops.
The matter now lands in the lap of the Board of Supervisors, which must decide on the issue within 45 days. If it sides with the MTA, the matter could head to court….
She and others plan to file an appeal under the California Environmental Quality Act to the supervisors, saying the city has failed to analyze and mitigate the environmental impacts of the agreement. They argue the tech shuttles displace low-income and minority communities and have adverse impacts to air quality. (It unclear how the latter accusation came about since it is believed that most tech workers would drive their private cars to work if the shuttles didn’t exist.)
“Rents and evictions have soared along the Google bus route,” Shortt, who lives on Valencia Street, which is filled with tech shuttles during commute time, said in a statement. “All of my neighbors are worried that they will be the next one to get an eviction notice.” READ MORE.
Mission Local, how about deleting the homophobic and misogynist personal attack, complete with hate-speech, on the ED of the Housing Rights Committee? Not ok.
Yes. we’ve now gone through them. Best, Lydia
No, it is not.
Notice it’s always (and only) the landlords defending these buses. It’s pretty simple: they make more money when ten thousand techies pile off the buses.
That’s the extent of their engagement with San Francisco: to suck the maximum amount of money out of renters.
Ummm, once again nutrisystem demonstrates his ignorance. I think there are lots of non-landlords (including myself), who are fine with the buses.
The thing that I find odd in the debate are the progressive who seem to think it would be better if the techies rode government subsidized mass transit rather than having their employers pay all the costs.
That’s just not true. I’m not a landlord and I know a lot of people who think the buses are an overall good thing.
Pretty much 🙂
No, I support the buses on several grounds:
1) More transit options is always desirable
2) Bus travel is more environmentally friendly than cat travel
3) The ability to work en route helps productivity
4) I believe in free choice and liberty
It’s not clear to me what arguments are opposed, other than envy.
….The whole tech bus protest is such a farce, it’s actually quite comical. Friends of mine from around the country have been inquiring into these rather strange protests. They can’t understand how high quality employment is a bad thing for a city. I just tell them it’s one of those “only in San Francisco” things, for I can’t provide any rational explanation except for extreme entitlement, stubbornness and envy.
One way to neutralize resistance is for those seeking insulation to change the focus from a difficult to deal with issue to one more digestible.
In this case, instead of addressing the substance of the appeal, the trolls are changing the subjecCEQAt to one of the activists involved.
“Troll” is just a word that gets thrown out when someone is losing an argument, so they retaliate with personal attacks.
It’s impossible to troll ML because ML doesn’t have a ideological mission. It exists to report stories and not to opine on them in a slanted way.
If a liberal posts on a Fox News site just to get into arguments, then that is trolling. But ML is neither left nor right, or at least should not normally be.
“Mission Local welcomes comments, but we ask readers to keep discussion civil and on-topic. We reserve the right to delete material that is libelous, a personal attack, or posted by a single user. Mission Local assumes no liability for comments posted to the site and no endorsement is implied; commenters are solely responsible for their own content. For concerns about comments posted to this site, please contact us at staff [at] missionlocal.org.”
If you understand the real underlying motives of who is making a claim, then the claim may be refuted without consideration of the claim.
Congratulations, you just outed yourself as a first-rate bigot. You and race-baiting John deserve each other.
What a gutter the ML comments section has turned into. A real cesspool.
Yes, the comments here got out of hand and some did little to contribute to a civil conversation.
Pot, meet kettle.
What’s more important, an ongoing rampage against our community or hating trolls insulting paid activists? It is not like you can shame these people by calling them bigots and it does not tell anyone anything that they don’t know.
Whoa. Way to discredit yourself here and on every other forum you post. You couldn’t resist that cheap language?
I am sorry if it offends you when a mighty midget from the Rent Control Industrial Complex attempts to abuse city powers to serve her own regressive and backward looking interests. I think it’s bad city politics.
The irony is that the opposition here is to nothing more than a trial period and evaluation. And the city is collecting revenues where previously it was not.
I’m not interested in Sara’s sexual orientation unless that explains this hapless misdirected anger and irrationality.
Adverse impacts on air quality? Has Sara completely lost her mind? The buses keep thousands of cars off the road.
Sara is clueless about transit and CEQA. She’s just a mindless mouthpiece for the ideology that says that a tenant should have a lifetime right to a cheap rent on principle. And that evictions should never happen even though it is clearly public policy that they happen in prescribed situations.
Shortt is off her head, her meds, or both. There is no requirement for SFMTA to take into account spurious connections between transit options and alleged “displacement”. SFMTA’s sole job is to determine the cost of a bus using a muni stop ten times a week and all the evidence indicates that ten bucks covers that.
HRC, SEIU and the usual suspects. Case dismissed. If Shortt doesn’t like the fact that it is public policy to allow no-fault evictions in certain situations then she should be fighting to remove the takings clause from the constitution an not whining about commuting options that remove cars from our streets.