Purchasing the Future
The year of 2008 is already shaping up as a fascinating one, but tough decisions are ahead. BART, professional sports and our incredibly increasing deficits—state, local and national—are going to loom very large.
When we look for solutions to our transportation and traffic needs, it is important that we do not “destroy the village to save it.” I am concerned that the VTA does not have the sense or the judgment to make a big move. And although the new director is a significant improvement, there is still much more to improve. With a great deal of money needed to make it happen—read: tax increase—there is no certainty that BART in San Jose will become a reality. I hope the good judgment of the San Jose representatives on the VTA and the common sense of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group will move the discussion and the actions in the right direction.
Interestingly, a friend sent me a recent article from the Los Gatos Weekly Times quoting a 102-year-old column by my grandfather, Patrick, in the San Jose Mercury Herald (where he was city editor), on why the then year-old, advanced road from Los Gatos to San Jose had not ruined the businesses of Los Gatos. It mirrors the argument used to great dismay by the downtown merchants of San Jose in the sixties when many of them opposed the connection to BART and San Francisco for similar fears. I think that much of the malaise in our downtown would not have occurred and that it never would have happened as it did—tragically—if that connection had been made. So much for the what-ifs of history.
Major sports facilities are on the horizon. The A’s, 49ers and Earthquakes are all pursuing new homes. I think the football facility in Santa Clara may be a bridge too far. The A’s move to Fremont is proceeding calmly, judiciously, and soundly towards a conclusion. Yet, the second-tier sport of soccer with our old team the Earthquakes seems to have the best chance of success and making a positive impact on our city. (In the interest of full disclosure, the Earthquakes are partially owned by the Sharks where I am a member of the ownership group.) Where else can we get a spin-off near the downtown, astride the airport and bridging the historic gap to Santa Clara and the stately “Mission campus” of Santa Clara University both physically with a pedestrian bridge and psychologically with filling in one hundred acres of empty, former FMC property. Call it a bridge to the future. It can come at little cost to the city via a land designation to appreciate the Earthquakes owner’s property in Edenvale—something that costs the city little for a major sports venue in an area of rising spectator interest.
On the budget, we have to make tough decisions. This is a time to combine hope with solid judgment. The solutions are clear, but not easy; nonetheless, it will be vital for our city council to implement them. More about this next week.
Tom,
Do you remember 1979-1980 issues in San Jose with respect to traffic? Do you remember the Car that was parked on the edge of the un-compleeted connector ramp, connecting I-680 and U.S. 101. The car was reasting at the edge of the un- finished connector overlooking the freeways down below. Remember the photo taken of the car in San Jose perched up in the air on the front cover of a national magazine?? Take a copy of that magazine to your Los Gatos friend, a good exchange.
In 1979 IBM was threatening to leave San Jose and move to Tuson, Arizona unless San Jose could correct it`s grid lock problems. The state of California was broke then too, no Federal help either.
Now we have the I-280/I-880 interchange problem and the governor says we are broke and can`t help. How about the traffic problems at the I-280/iI-680/U.S. 101 interchange, the I280/hwy 85 interchange, the I-280/hwy 87 interchange, the hwy 85/U.s.101 interchange @ Mt View,the U.S. 101/85 interchange at south San Jose, the mess at Saratoga Ave @ I-280 on ramp. The grid locked hwy 237 @ I-880 & U.S. 101, The grid locked hwy 87 with it`s 4 lane parking lot. The grid locked hwy 85.
Did your grandfather have these problems in San Jose?
We have to ask ourselves “if our traffic problems in all the above mentioned interchanges will be corrected if “we” build BART to the east bay”??
Why isn`t Alameda County willing to build BART to San Jose? It is for their benefit.
Alameda county doesn`t have to pay $50 million a year to join BART like we will if they build it. Why isn`t SVLG asking Alameda County to build it and save San Jose and Santa Clara County $50 million a year for life just to join the BART group?
“The developers”, many of which have made a fortune in Santa Clara County now have Big property investments in Alameda County, “land that they purchased a lot cheeper than San Jose land”,now look to San Jose tax payers to build them a BART system to Warm Springs/Union City (at our expense).
I believe things are a whole lot different today in San Jose than during our grandfathers time.
The reason we have traffic problems, the reasons we have the worst roads in the nation, the reason we are still testing Hybrid buses 8 years later is VTA is sinking every penny they can get their hands on into building BART.
We need a new list of the top 12 questions to ask the VTA people, not the ones they have on line.
Tom, usually your reasoning makes sense, but this one seems fishy. Did you really write this?
You follow one of the longest sentences ever written with some gobbledygook about “land designation to appreciate the Earthquake owner’s property”. What does that mean? Are you talking about rezoning team owners’ other property to Residential, with the ensuing long-term drain on city budgets? That hardly “costs little”. Why do people feel that giving developers a favorable rezoning against the city’s long-term interests is a freebie?
Regarding BART: the Merc, VTA and the SVLG are clearly not telling you the whole story on how much having BART in the Valley will really cost. Example: VTA wants to have a 1/8-cent sales tax this year. According to the Hay Group audit last year, $$$ equivalent to a 1/4-cent sales tax would still be needed. Even if voters in the county passed a 1/8-cent sales tax this year, the transit/technology complex known as VTA/SVLG would have to go back to voters again to pass another 1/8-cent sales tax.
Given how all government projects (particularly BART projects) always double their original “projected” cost, is the county ready to have a 9% minimum sales tax just to have BART in the Valley? Would YOU be willing to live or work in a county with a 9% sales tax? You’d likely do what I did nearly 4 years ago and move somewhere where the sales tax is lower.
Another example of VTA/SVLG not telling the whole story on what having BART here will truly cost: did you know that VTA has an agreement with BART (approved in 2002) which uses operations money for buses and light rail to pay for running BART if no “revenue stream” (read: sales tax $$$) is found by 2009?
Do not get me started on how the county’s bus system will soon have the same number of buses it had between 1980 and 1981 on January 14. That’s the real story behind VTA’s bus restructuring that will take place.
To Richard Z: I would be happy to host such a top 10 list of REAL questions to ask VTA about BART if you would help write it. I’ve already put that challenge to the VTA watchdog/advocacy group I run.
It’s well past time the county woke up, smelled the coffee, and started holding VTA accountable. To that end, I am willing to talk to any neighborhood, civic, or non-profit group (this means YOU, Ed Rast) about how to hold VTA accountable.
Tom writes “I hope the good judgment of the San Jose representatives on the VTA and the common sense of the Silicon Valley Leadership Group will move the discussion and the actions in the right direction.”
Yeah, right.
The grossly misnamed Silicon Valley “Leadership” Group has been a big problem on the BART project all along. They’re the ones who bankrolled the unsuccessful 1996 Measure A sales tax increase. Callers to SVLG HQ during that campaign were greeted with “Yes on A” when the receptionist picked up the phone. SVLG does not care about the common taxpayer of Santa Clara County, they instead want us to fund a multi-billion dollar boondoggle that would benefit out of county commuters, to the extent it benefits anyone at all.
As long as Carl and SVLG are around, there will be agitation for more tax increases to fund BART at the expense of cheaper, better alternatives. See Bay Rail’s Metro East proposal, for example:
http://www.bayrailalliance.org/caltrain_metro_east
If memory serves me—and my sister was among the first BART riders; I made frequent runs to Fremont to pick up and drop off—the first trains didn’t even start running until after 1970.
Tom states above that SJ’s downtown might not have hit the skids if the downtown retailers hadn’t opposed BART to SJ back in the 60’s. As a life-long SJ resident I am quite aware that downtown’s decline began in the late 50’s when BART was barely on the drawing boards and hit bottom before the first trains even started running. Either I’m not getting it, or the lack of a BART line to SJ had absolutely nothing to do with the decline of downtown.
I place more blame on the City Council members who held office in the late 50’s through the 70’s and allowed entire blocks of historic buildings and associated retail space to be bulldozed in the name of urban renewal and sit vacant for years. The end result was Park Center Plaza, a non-retail development that turns its back on the public, and the disappearance of Hart’s, Hale’s, J.C. Penney, Roos-Atkins, and even Thrifty Drug. That’s just the very short list of big hitters. Only Woolworths hung on and it’s decisions like that that helped to put them out of business.
I don’t give a rat’s ass about soccer or any other sport for that matter. Just a bunch of grown men behaving like children who are incapable of being proper role models for kids who are conditioned by pushy parents to be interested. Build the stadium if you want—smack on top of an EPA superfund site, like that won’t double the cost—just don’t hit me up for one lousy dime to help you out. Don’t you dare.
Talk about Gary Gillmor benefitting from his post as Mayor, look who is talking. Tom McEnery, a professional lobbyist, who got an arena so he could get a job, is now blasting Santa Clara once again. Gee, the stadium gets backing from the San Jose Sports Authority, and here is Tom McEnery, writing from his mansion, Xanadu, mumbling “rosebud,” and cutting clippings in his bathrobe blasting our community, while subsidies for San Antonio Plaza just made him richer.
John B
You’re right on that long sentence – it’s a book. Aside from that, the question is simple: do we change Lew Wolff’s property to residential in order to get a soccer stadium and some nice development on the old FMC site. I have an ownership interest in the Sharks, therefore the Earthquakes – I think you know that. People will have to make up their mind if in addition to the 1400 ac, of land we changed and got nothing in the past 16 yrs. – do we want to trade 80ac, and the resulting ‘cost’. Well, maybe not so simple, but at least I wrote a bit shorter sentence. Thanks for the comments, TMcE
John B, is Barry Witt your God? Do you accept his “journalism” as divine doctrine?
The residential conversion is to fund a BUSINESS venture elsewhere in San Jose. Wolff will BUY the FMC property at MARKET VALUE and SAVE the city 7.5 MILLION in taxes that it currently pays on the land. Wolff will also PAY FOR MAINTENANCE of the site. Residential AND COMMERCIAL uses will be incorporated into both sites, providing the city millions in tax revenues (that which you’re crying about).
I’ve never been the greatest proponent of MLS/Earthquakes in our city, and I’ve butted heads many a time with SSV bloggers. But I agree with Mr. McEnery that the Earthquakes and new soccer stadium at FMC will be positive for our city. I look forward to taking my young daughter to catch a match or international friendly. This all being said, I hope San Jose’s pursuit of major league sports (particularly the big three of MLB, NFL, NBA) doesn’t end with soccer. While (unfortunately) baseball and football no longer look possible, hopefully NBA will be in our immediate future. Whether it’s through a team relocation or waiting out the Warriors lease at Oracle in 2017, NBA at the Shark Tank will be good for downtown and San Jose in general: in conjunction with the NHL season, 18,000+ patrons for 40+dates downtown is awesome critical mass for the core! Anyhow, congrats Quakes fans, and here’s hoping the rest of us will one day have something to celebrate.
Tom
The City of San Jose, Santa Clara County, The State of California and The United States of America all have structural deficits. The American people owe a massive amount on their credit cards.
China was instrumental in inventing or developing paper making, the compass, multistage rockets, printing, silk fabric, tea as a beverage, the wheelbarrow, the umbrella, gunpowder and modern medicine.
China, by investing in American treasury bonds is keeping America afloat.
America needs to face its failures and weaknesses.
America’s only hope is to become a province of China, a subsidiary, a protege.
Each American should enroll in a Mandarin language class at their local community college.
America has self-destructed, China is the future.
Mark T is correct, the first BART trains, running between Fremont and Oakland-MacArthur started running in 1972. The first day of service was September 11, 1972. That date lives in imfamy now for another reason. See the BART history at:
http://www.bart.gov/docs/BARThistory.pdf
Tom, I talked to you personally and I believe you are in full support of the Santa Clara 49ers stadium. It will be beneficial to San Jose, other cities, and the County in economic, social, and cultural benefits. I know you must be nearsighted when you are looking at bridges.
Tom,
Lets look at the VTA Board of Directors in 2007 especially the ones sitting on the Board that represent San Jose residents and ask them the “quality hard questions” that have never been put in front of us? If they are doing their job and working in the best interest of the residents and not the SVLG and Developers, then they should have been honest with us !!
Board Members from San Jose: Forest Williams, Chair of the VTA finance committee, Dominic Cortese a long time member of the board, Sam Licardo, Nora Campos, Judy Chirco, Chuck Reed Chairman and Ken Yeager(alternate).
Between them they should be able to do some brain storming and answer the hard questions and why VTA hasn`t been honest with us.
“Barry Witt” well, well…???
We need to ask our people on the Board @ VTA how they are going to fix all our grid lock problems her in Santa Clara County/San Jose and where is that money going to come from.
We need to ask them how they are going to get us off the #1 spot on the list of the cities of our size with the worst roads in the USA.
We need to ask them how much longer they will be testing Hybrid buses? Will we ever get caught up with the rest of the Bay Area and the U.S. cities that have already purchased them.
We need to ask them how “we would be better off in San Jose/santa Clara County if we build BART to the east bay”?
We need to ask them if building BART to the East Bay will solve our other pressing problems that are going to get worse with all this new high density construction they have approved?
Wake Up !! Come clean !! Get us out of this mess we are in.
This BART program if I understand it right will brake VTA and thus destroy all of our VTA services in our County.
The revolving door of principles here at San Jose Inside is spinning backwards and forwards once again. Tom McEnery made the comment in the early 1990s that he could support a small utility tax for Santa Clara’s stadium, but then McEnery advocated a one percent utility tax for San Jose projects like the arena. McEnery pleaded with Santa Clara to open and expand the Tasman Bridge, which was a “bridge too far,” and Santa Clara did it.
McEnery just hates Santa Clara and the fact that Santa Clara has to make San Jose projects work with Santa Clara money.
#4
Would YOU be willing to live or work in a county with a 9% sales tax? You’d likely do what I did nearly 4 years ago and move somewhere where the sales tax is lower.
Moving just to get a lower sales tax is not necessarily the best investment strategy. After all, just how much will you save? Even going from a 9% rate to 5% rate will not save all that much. It would take a lot of purchases before many people can recoup the cost of a move. Of course, if you are still commuting back to the area where you used to live you will probably lose money due to higher transportation costs.
It is like people who have a operational, working, and paid off car that gets 15 MPG who buy a $25,000 car that gets 40 MPG in order to save money on gas. It will take years, if at all, before you recoup your investment and start saving money on gas.
However, not to be misunderstood, Santa Clara County sales tax is high enough, and I will not vote to increase it for BART. Maybe I will support an increase for something useful and worthwhile, but BART to San Jose is a fiasco that needs to have a stake put through its heart.
#4 Eugene Bradley
If I understand you re: “…the VTA agreement with the BART people in 2000…using operations money from buses and light rail”, we are in a lot of trouble already if we go forward with BART to the East Bay?
The agreement basicly protects the BART people in the event VTA can`t pay the $50 million annual membership fee, the $48million operating cost and service the Bond to builb the BART system, and we fail to make our monthly obligations, then BART can come into our VTA bank account and take our operating money before a penny goes to other VTA services like buses, light rail, roads etc. In essence that would bring those services to a halt, STOP??? Do I understand you right? Do our people know this?
#4 Blue Fox, I agree with your ending.
Let`s try the Sales Tax item again, a little differantly. San Jose desperatly needs sales tax dollars revenues and jobs to pay for city services.
Pretend you were going to buy a new Toyota. Would you buy it in a County with a 7% sales tax or san Jose with a 9% sales tax?
Tuesday morning`s Merc said the City Council wanted to raise sales tax to pay off our debt. Between thw two, VTA & the City we could be headed for 10% sales tax.
Now we would make another top ten list, in first place with the highest sales tax in the nation.
Another new report came out recently. San Jose placed #11 in the nation in Roadway delays, aka grid locks. With all our new high density construction underway we will probably move into the top 3 spot.
If I was working for a chamber of commerce from another city and trying to get a company to move to my city vs. San Jose, I would have coppies of all the top ten lists that make San Jose look bad in my portfolio.
Wonder why we are failing ?
Bluefox:
Living in Santa Cruz, even with my commute to Monterey to my new job, I save about $500 a year as opposed to living in the Valley. Most of that comes in the form of lower gas/electric bills from living near the beach as opposed to living inland in the summer.
The savings on gasoline, wear & tear, and insurance living in Santa Cruz vs. the Valley with my new job should also be obvious to you.
In short, VTA’s ignorance and stonewalling of the County Civil Grand Jury report in 2004 drove me to leave the county. To this day, I will only buy anything in the county when I’m fully reimbursed for it. (Example: a friend of mine gives me tickets to a Sharks game with $$$ for food). Otherwise my shopping and entertainment needs go to Santa Cruz, Monterey or San Francisco. Call it “exercising the power of the purse” if you will.
Richard: This little-publicized sellout of the county’s buses and light rail by VTA occured in September 2002:
http://www.vta.org/inside/boards/packets/2002/sep/25.html
My attempts in vain to fight what VTA was doing is detailed here in Agenda item 25:
http://www.vta.org/news/calendar/meeting.pl?idx=880
These are examples of how VTA continues to pursue projects with no guaranteed funding. Or in this case, funding at the expense of others. The agreement eventually means further service cuts and possibly fare hikes to make up for what was lost. Shockingly few in the local press have dared to question this possibly illegal agreement.
VTA has also not accounted for over $200 million in funding for retirees’ pensions and benefits. This is detailed in the Hay Group audit that came out last year:
http://www.vta.org/inside/boards/packets/2007/03_mar/032307/org_fin_report.pdf
As I said previously, this county needs to wake up NOW to what’s happening. As taxpayers and voters, we need to demand the transit/technology complex known as VTA and SVLG be honest about BART and its true impact on the quality of life in the Valley.
For James Rowen – against better judgment, I am going to respond. I actually admire Santa Clara as ‘can do’ city; its also a great place for an education. The various “Rowen attacks” are silly and inaccurate. I have ownership interests in Downtown and the Sharks. I am not a paid lobbyist; I did not have any affiliation with the Sharks for years after I left the Mayor’s office: ok, Mr. Rowen? And the utility tax – I never advocated its incr. as Mayor – I advised people not to touch it. And the Tasman Bridge was wanted by SC much worst than SJ – that’s a fact, try to live with those stubborn items as you determine the color of the sky in your world. TMcE
Wow! another serious person said it, “There is no certainty that BART in San Jose will become a reality.”
I’d like to nominate Eugene Bradley for the VTA Board. Oops…I forgot, we’re not permitted to choose who serves on that board!
In yesterday’s Mercury, we read about the various taxes and fees (and cuts) that are coming San Jose’s way. I believe that the budget problem could be solved by diverting (for two years) some of the RDA money to fixing problems in RDA zones. (A lot of people don’t know that you can fix potholes with RDA money in RDA zones). Also, rather than flipping city entitlements for a new soccer stadium, dedicate that potential windfall towards fixing the infrastructure of our eroding city.
Pete Campbell
Note for Mr. McEnery, it is too bad I have been spending the last hour finding better pictures of “Latka Gravas” to compare to your stunning portrait. It reminds me of your desire to defend the state prison going up near the Tasman Bridge you want for the community. Now, to cases, Tom, I worked hard to support you for Congress, as I matter of fact, the note you wrote me thanking me for all of the research work I did for you is one of my most treasured possesions, even now after you had to reduce yourself to a personal attack me for defending Santa Clara and reminding us all of your waffling over the utlitiy tax in the 1990s. You begged the people of San Jose for a one percent utility tax, and under I note under five Mayors, Santa Clara has never had deficit, unlike the bond market fiasco of San Jose’s. How does a mayor lose 60 million dollars and get reelected? The fact is you did not want a stadium in Santa Clara, and that you are a professional lobbyist though you have written blog after blog about lobbying. I admired Mayor McEnery, what body snatcher from Neptune replaced him with this guy.
#20
While moving to Santa Cruz makes sense for you since you work in Monterey, as I said, moving to a lower sales tax area probably will not work for most people if all they are interested in is saving money.
Also, I need to clarify my comment that I will not vote for a sales tax increase to bring BART to San Jose.
That refers to the idea of bringing BART down the east side of the Bay into San Jose. That is a waste of time and money.
However, I will support bringing BART down the west side of the Bay, and connecting San Jose with San Francisco, SFO, and all the cities in between. That is a much more useful scenario for Santa Clara county residents, and will do more to get commuters off the road than the current proposal.
Once that is operational we can start thinking of ringing the Bay with BART.
It is reassuring that a previous Mayor of a large City like San Jose understands the 49er stadium issues; the Santa Clara City Council is reaching beyond the City of Santa Clara’s financial capabilities in an attempt to justified the 49ers stadium proposal. The City Manager’s report has already indicated a negative return of $71M for this project and also that there is $51M gap in the funding requested by the 49ers. As for James Rowen, he is a paid political consultant and this should be considered when reading any of his statements
BlueFox, we already have Caltrain. That’s a suitable alternative for the east side of the bay, too. Having both on the peninsula is dumber than anything proposed so far in this thread.
. It is true that I have always admired and loved the work Tom McEnery has done for Silicon Valley. Indeed, it has always been a thrill for me to talk to Tom and meet him on many occasions.
2. Today we got into a shooting war of blogs, because I will not let Tom get away with disrespecting the work of Santa Clara.
3. Now that I have fought the war to legtimate conclusion, as with the Monitor and the Merrimac, and we both have won, I extend my hand to a true gentleman of the Valley.
4. Ps, the stadium is still a winner for Santa Clara, and Tom still has forthright opinions and courage to engage in a discussion with a fellow journalist.
Bluefox, BART down the peninsula is a really dumb idea. Basically, it involves replacing a functioning Caltrain with a wildly expensive BART. It’d be much more cost effective to upgrade Caltrain. Read this explanation:
http://www.bayrailalliance.org/q_why_not_replace_caltrain_bart_wont_cost_same_ele
If you need further proof, look at the BART extension to SFO and Millbrae. This project was gold-plated with unnecessary tunneling south of the Colma station.
#26
I have never used Caltrain so I cannot comment if it is better, worse, or the same as BART.
The point is that mass transit between SF and SJ, and associated areas in between, makes more sense for SCC commuters than BART between San Jose and Livermore. Especially if SCC taxpayers are the ones paying for it.
The VTA has no money because it doesn’t want it or know how to get it, at least from would be riders. I once had $41.53 in cash in my pocket and a Mastercard with enough of a limit to afford the $1.75 light rail fare. I could not purchase a ticket. The machine did not accept credit cards, ATMs, or bills greater than $10. I wrote to them a year ago and asked, “wouldn’t it make sense to have these machines accept credit cards, here, you know, in the Silicon Valley?” I got a call saying it was a great idea and we’ll get back to you. One year later, what do you think has happened? “The New VTA?” I keep hearing on the radio and laughing…
Murky News, VTA, Forrest Williams—the Three Stooges of Silicon Valley. No wonder we’re in such a mess.
Good points raised by everyone today and prior about VTA’s current poor operations, proposed BART expansion finances and if San Jose / Santa Clara County can afford both BART and the badly needed public transit operations and improvements ( Caltrain, Light Rail, Bus, paratransit and van pools) to connect county residents between where they live, work, shop and want to travel in our current state, county and local budget crises
BART is a wide track gauge custom transit system with custom software and different electrical system which substantially increase purchase and operating costs while most other California and US transit systems are standard gauge with diesel electric or overhead electrical wires that can be bid and bought from a number of rail equipment companies saving taxpayers hundreds of millions and allows many transit operators systems to further reduce costs by group purchases and to less expensively and easily upgrade equipment and software Very few governments especially with local, state and federal deficits buy custom one of a kind equipment or software which requires costly specialized training or outside companies to maintain but BART continues to do so Every major and many small BART construction project have been significantly over budget and late mainly as studies have shown because the cost and time estimated have been wrong and as some have said purposely so to gain voter approval There is widespread history of public construction and transit projects especially underground grossly under estimated with Boston’s Big Dig the latest example
High speed rail in Europe, Japan and proposed California high speed system all run on standardized rail equipment on standard track gauge which means that there is interchangeability of equipment between different systems and cost savings
We could run most standard rail equipment on most transit systems as long as there are no height clearances problems using existing or quickly constructed bypass rail lines and diesel electric engines which is a real benefit in emergency situations or loss of electrical power but BART could be in major disaster would be out of service for weeks or months Caltrain was up and running within hours of 1989 Earthquake since I came home to San Jose from work in San Francisco that night
VTA is well know as very poor transit operator and recently VTA’s Hay Report indicated that VTA currently is about $3 billion unfunded for current operations and have one of lowest fare box recover rates ( 15% ) in the US due to underutilization which even with some other revenue sources mean taxpayers pay the difference
There are serious VTA Board governance issues and conflict of interest issues that the SCC Civil Grand Jury, Hay Report, US DOT and other have raised and California is doing a report due later this year that will apparently also question both Board governance and financial stability of VTA and BART extension without substantial new local taxes which most voters I have talked to are unwilling to approve
I am a very strong public transit supporter, have Masters in Transportation (Thesis – Financing Alternatives for Urban Mass Transit ) and Master in Business Administration – Accounting / Finance, worked in transportation for over 9 years, have for years had transit system operators as clients as well as used for decades public transit on daily basis to / from work and weekends both in US and Europe
San Jose and Santa Clara County needs comprehensive well run and financed public transit system to and from where people live, work and want to go but the current VTA Board governance and transit operations are inadequate to meet our current complex time consuming needs.
There are many very serious unanswered questions as to VTA’s strategic direction, finances, Board governance, many undisclosed or widely unknown or misunderstood questions about current operations and BART that need to be answered soon
I personally believe we need an elected knowledgeable VTA Board responsible to taxpayers / voters rather than our current part time appointed elected official VTA Board who are dealing with their city or county financial deficits and other responsibilities not leaving them the time to study, learn and have the necessary time or focus to deal with VTA’s many problems
We need to make the VTA Board changes before VTA gets worst and we lose people and jobs from Santa Clara County / San Jose to other counties or regions of US due to traffic congestion, high taxes and poor quality of life and cause VTA to further reduce service or go possible go bankrupt due to current transit operations plus proposed BART obligations
There is a old saying that is over used but fits VTA: “ Doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results.” – We need to change VTA Board to get a needed better public transit result
Everyone,
BART is not rapid transit. I have used CalTrain from San Jose to San Francisco and back.
CalTrain during peak travel times is faster than driving a car to San Francisco. I have used the CalTrain express which is even faster. I arrive in San Francisco relaxed. I have no gasoline expenses or wear and tear on my car. When I get off the train there is all kinds of transportation for my use at the station. I can walk half a block and catch the S.F. light rail. I can take a bus or cab to my destination as they are all there at the station.
Comparing BART to CalTrain is a joke. BART makes several stops along the way. BART from San Francisco to San Jose would take twice as long as CalTrain. BART tickets are more expensive than the light rail or CalTrain.
Light Rail and CalTrain both run on Standard American Gage tracks, as does 60% of the trains in the World. BART does not run on Standard American Gage tracks. Light rail can run on Union Pacific or Southern Pacific tracks, BART can not.
Our light rail system does not have adequate bus service supporting it. Our Light Rail Parking Lots are too small. These two items hinder the success of Light Rail.
BART Trains to San Jose and it`s San Jose Stations does not have a plan for connecting buses to take you from the BART stations to work.
BART does not plan for dedicated tracks to San Jose from the east bay, dedicated tracks for rapid transit in its plan. To do this BART would need three tracks.
AGAIN we have been lied to by the people pushing BART.
The VTA has tons of money, actually. More than 300 million dollars per year just in sales tax. Add state and federal money on top of that.
How they spend it is a whole different question. They spend more per bus than MUNI, SamTrans, ACTransit, or almost any other agency in the nation. When you waste cash like that, it goes quick.
As a result, they have to ask for more. But it isn’t because they lack revenue.
RE: Research Brief, PPIC
From:Public Policy Institute Of California
Subject:“Patterns and Trends in the Location Decisions of California Businesses”
http://www.ppic.org/content/pubs/rb/RB_1107JKRB.pdf
” Patterns and trends in the location decisions of California”
“Establishment relocations within the state are much more common than relocations into and out of the state”
“Among intrastate relocations, short distance moves are more common than long distance moves”.
“THE AUTHORS OF THE REPORT FIND THAT NEARLY ALL OF THE SIGNIFICANT JOB MIGRATION WITHIN THE STATE OCCURS BETWEEN ADJACENT COUNTIES”-outward from centeral cities or inland from coast.
“This short-distance pattern suggests that businesses are not moving primarily in search of differently skilled or cheaper labor or a more friendly businss climate”, RATHER IT IS MORE CONSISTANT WITH BUSINESSES LOOKING TO BE CLOSER TO A MORE AFFORDABLE REAL ESTATE MARKET, or customers who have who have themselves moved toward less expensive real estate”.
So Santa Clara County taxpayers will pay to help local Silicon Valley businesses move jobs to East Bay Cities !!
The SVLG knows what most residents / taxpayers do not know about BART to the East Bay.
An example given,” Los Angeles County” has lost High Tech Jobs to “Orange County”.
San Jose/santa Clara County will lose jobs to Warm Springs and Union City in Alameda County where land is much cheaper, where developers and Silicon Valley companies have purchased cheaper land. This is how the SVLG makes money at Santa Clara County tax payers expense.
In essance the SVLG doesn`t care about our traffic conjestion, grid lock problems and the condition of our roads, they just want to move on.
Tom as a 4th generation San Jose person, I believe we have come a long way. But San Jose is and always has been a differant city and that is about to change. San Francisco has always been run by the powerful elite. San Jose has always had a strong citizen/neighborhood governing body to guide us and this has always worked well for us.
San Jose has always been the perfect place to raise a family compared to San Francisco/Oakland. We were always a “livable city”.
There are a lot of issues today. Our “Quality of Life” issues are in trouble.
We have to ask ourselves some srrious questions. Our local news paper has to put all the cards on the table, not just what the special interest groups want us to hear. The Mercury has really dropped the ball on this one.
There are two sides to an argument, the Merc has only reported one side of the story/problem to the voters.
It`s time to wake uu and “put San Jose Frst”.
Anyone want to talk professional sports? Could you imagine the “positive impact on our city” that a Major League ballpark would have had downtown…81+ homes games with 32,000 fans flocking downtown to catch America’s Pastime. It’s unfortunate that Major League Baseball made our city a “slave” to SF and the Giants, but the territorial rights are what they are and have stopped the A’s cold in Fremont…just 11 miles shy of where they should be! To be quite honest, I believe we actually have the leadership now (through Reed, Mr. McEnery, Munro, and Wolff himself) to get a deal done for San Jose baseball (as oppossed to the Gonzales years). It’s just that it no longer appears to be on anyone’s agenda anymore. Fremont/Cisco Field is far from a done deal, and with the Giants now owning 30% of FSN Bay Area, it’s now in their best interest for the A’s to be succesful (the higher the A’s TV ratings, the more money the Giants make). An A’s move to San Jose proper could have made money (and sense) for all parties involved (A’s, Giants, downtown SJ). Anyhow, enough downtown baseball dreaming. Back to the BART to SJ debate…
MLB is Not coming to San Jose, so be happy it is in Fremont not Oakland and you can still go by CalTrain to SF if you want to pay $200-400 for family of 4 – we get benefits at no cost to our weak budget
Most families can not afford to go to “corporate millionaire baseball” more than 1-2 times year if even that We need to fight to retain San Jose Giants as low cost family sports
Soccer will draw more people, cost less and in future will be like Sharks a great draw to San Jose
Anthony, I think MLB could be dealt with if we assure them that this will not set a precedent for other teams infringing on territorial rights. Others would have to meet this criteria, which would enable SJ to have MLB:
– the new location would be further from rights owners than current location
– the municipality would have a greater population than that of the rights owners
This would prevent many dreaded situations such as a team in New Jersey (always the most feared example). Meeting these specific criteria could open the door with opening the floodgates. Plus, it just makes business sense for baseball.
#42, Any reason why our past Earthquakes never became “like Sharks?” And don’t use Spartan Stadium as an excuse. Psss…it will be years (perhaps decades) for MLS to be on par with the Arena Football League, let alone NHL Hockey/Sharks. #41 We’re not getting World Cup calibre soccer, we’re getting MLS! And billions of American kids have been playing youth soccer for decades; this Almaden phenomenon isn’t new. Heck, I played soccer as a kid, AND I LOVE THE NFL! But I do love international soccer (especially the English Premier League), so maybe Lew Wolff’s soccer stadium with occasional friendly isn’t a bad thing.
#37- David D. you should have learned by now not to ask Ed Rast to explain any of his lengthy posts. He won’t answer you. I think he just likes to appear as an authority by putting things on SJI, and then disappears until something else on here appears that interests him. He has a LONG history of posting here that bears out what I just said. Look at the column on opening Police reports to the public, Ed did his usual bomb dropping and flew off unaccountable for the mess the Sunshine Task Force is creating for victims. I personally think he doesn’t want to be challenged on his opinions, which are why he does this stuff. I think he’s spent too much time at City Hall, and has learned the perfect art of playing “Dodge Ball.”
Sub-prime. . . one more time.
Salesman: We have to use every technique possible to convince the VTA Family of BART’s ever increasing value and its affordability while making sure the total costs and risks stay hidden until the deal is inked.
VTA family: “You know dear, it’s always been our dream and it’s not that much money.”
Salesman: “It’s a really great deal because if you can’t fund the construction costs, membership fees and overruns, the cosigner would pick up the tab… how cool is that?” “Just sign here.”
Sub-prime. . . one more time.
So Ed, Richard, others:
Are you saying that to join BART would have SJ taxpayers shore up a non-standard, costly, inefficient regional system at the expense of more cops, open pools, improved roads, parks and code enforcement, longer library hours, improved city/county transit system. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . oh yes, repairing San Jose’s structural deficit?
Tom`s comments about the Earthquake`s and the new Soccer Stadium are a positive move for San Jose. One has only to look at Almaden Valley and the popularity of Soccer Teams that was once dominated by Foodball Leagues. The Football teams among the youth are gone. When these youngsters grow up they will join youngsters around the World as Soccer Fans.
Look at the crowds the World cup drew when we hosted the event.
San Jose has the perfect weather for Soccer. We need to play on our stregenths. The new stadium will be an excellent place for outdoor concerts in the Spring Summer and Fall weather when the Eartquakes are on the road.
Tom, SVLG, VTA Board, SJ City Council:
Lay out for us what it will cost to bring BART to San Jose…
—membership fee to join BART; ie. $/yr for how many years
—latest construction costs estimates
—operating costs yr/yr net after ridership revenue going forward
—ridership projections: min-max over the next 10, 20yrs
Ed, Richard, VTA, SJ Council, Staff others:
Lay out for us what it would coast to beef up our City /County transportation infrastructure to improve quality of live here in SCC / SJ
—latest construction costs estimates
—operating costs yr/yr net after ridership revenue
—ridership projections: min-max over the next 10, 20yrs
Mayor, City Manager, staff:
Calculate the difference between these two yr/yr for the next 10/20yrs and if less, tell us how that could translate to:
—more local infrastructure jobs
—increased SJPD staffing
—increased DOT budget for fixing roads and calming traffic
—increased Park & Rec staffing
—dealing with the structural deficit and improving other quality of life factors in San Jose
Can we see this before voting on BART to SJ?
#45 weeping williow glen is correct on the sales tax. The votors spoke on this matter in June 2006 but unfortunately, instead of listening, the VTA BOD will just try again in 2008.
I think that the best way to look at this issue is to compare it to the new San
Jose City Hall. It’s too bad that Mayor Reed has not made this connection. During his campaign, candidate Reed said that the excessive spending on the “Taj Gonzales” could have been better spent meeting various needs around the city. The BART to SJ plan, as presently conceived, needs to be looked at the same way.
The VTA Board still cannot agree on a plan for spending yet they want still another sales tax increase on transportation. It is utterly appalling that another sales tax increase in being considered at all, given the already high cost of living in this area.
What we need is cost-effective transportation projects that will allow all parts of the county to benefit from the money raised by the existing sales taxes we already pay for transportation. Such a project exists in the form of Michael Kiesling’s “Caltrain Metro East” proposal which is promoted by Margaret
Okuzumi’s Bay Rail Alliance. Rather than restate the advantages of Kiesling’s
plan, read Okuzumi’s article at
http://sanjose.bizjournals.com/sanjose/stories/2005/11/21/editorial2.html
and the excellent analysis at the “Cityscape” web page:
http://www.sfcityscape.com/maps/caltrain_metro_east.html
Furthermore, there is some compelling analysis of the BART project at the “vtawatch” blog located at http://vtawatch.blogspot.com/ . Pay particular
attention to the section titled “Clear cut fraudulent ridership projection “
Also consider that the VTA’s estimated cost of $4.7 billion is probably low as
reported by Cityscape: ” Hey, at least VTA finally admitted the project will cost more than $4.2 billion: The new estimate is $4.7 billion, still a billion-and-a-half dollars less than the FTA figures it will cost”.
In conclusion, I wish the Mayor and the VTA board reconsider their support of the BART extension.
Kathleen
I am limited as Chair Sunshine and to comply with Sunshine’s Code Of Conduct and Ethics about what I can discuss about Sunshine outside Sunshine public meetings.
Additionally a few prior commitment have gone way beyond what I thought they would take have almost no free time so have limited my non essential activities As you have probably seen, I only infrequently commented on SJI lately and that will be the way it will be for months
Don’t read SJI for days I possibly would have missed your comment, if a friend had not called me If you have questions other than Sunshine directly contact me and I will try to reply but can not get into a long discussion While you have a right to your opinion but your harsh comment seems a bit inappropriate
David,
#37 – short answer to complex question There are serious concerns / questions if BART is solution to SCC transit problems and if we can afford needed San Jose infrastructure as well as comprehensive county wide public transit system which is rated as one of worst managed, very underutilized systems in US since many people can not get to / from desired destinations
#38 This will take research and I will try to reply to your complex questions but I probably will not get to it for at least 1-2 weeks or more
Short answer BART is way more expensive than any other transit and off shelf transit equipment standard track gauge operated on mostly existing or constructed dedicated tracks can move all future passengers for decades at less cost at higher capacity and speeds Part of out cost efficient answer is common track usage with existing and proposed CA high speed rail
#44 Kathleen,
You are always a breath of fresh air.
It seems San Jose Inside is the one media that we are able to open up a discussion and hear from both sides. I like that.
I`d like to hear more from those who have opposing views from the norm, or, as you said,” the news in print feeds us what they want us to hear, not all the facts, just the slanted views.
Lets talk about some of the people I would like to hear more from that are many times bullied or poked at in the press or at important meetings. Intellegent people that ask quality questions:
Tom McHenery, Greg Perry, Ed Rast, Eugene Bradley, Norman Kline, Pierluigi Oliverio. I`d like to hear from Pat Dando and the person I`ve read a lot about Carl Gardino too.These people all have something to say, and they all have opinions on BART, but although they be on differant sides on the issue.
Norm Kline was nice, he wanted more time to research my questions.
People say all that Tom cares about is Downtown San Jose, I think thats fine, he has done a bueatiful job delivering us a bueatiful downtown, but his job isn`t done yet, so listen to him, he has a lot of good ideas. Ed Rast, well I learned a lot from Ed Rast on his recent episitle for us. Doesn`t answer questions? Johnmichael says the same thing about Pierluigi, Norman Kline never answered my questions either., but all these people have things to bring to the table. Greg Perry has been silent to long, he`s a smart guy, Eugene Bradley too. Jack VanZandt, he`s just a good old boy, kind of like the “ol country boy style” but intellegent.
Kathleen, we need these great minds to open up on San Jose Inside. As you pointed out,“the Merc, the Metro and the Business Journal arn`t going to give us both sides of the argument.
How about a question for all of them on San Jose Inside ,” How are we going to be better off in San Jose if San Jose builds and pays for BART to the East Bay when the project is finished?
Another good question might be,” How is VTA going to Fix our roads and solve our grid lock problems after we build BART.
#47- Ed, if you are going to post comments on SJI, and it is in any way a conflict of interest, you should not be posting long threads of information on this or any other public blog, especially if you are going to use your position on the Task Force to increase the credibility of your posting. Using the argument you just posted as a means of avoiding answering honest questions from the public just further exemplifies my feelings about your hit and run posts. You can see my comments or position as harsh, but I think what you have been doing is inappropriate, and possibly a violation of your position on the Sunshine Task Force. The Sunshine Task Force is supposed to be encouraging “Open Government,” but your response in #47, reflects secrecy to me.
People who post on this blog have a right to question anything we see written here, and if you aren’t open to having information you post here challenged or questioned, then don’t be surprised if you get called on the carpet for it. Keeping this in mind Ed please be sure if you are going to post in future, you might want to check back and answer people’s questions on your posts.
I feel no need to contact you privately because I did take time out of my very busy schedule and appear before your Task Force on the opening of the Police Records issue. I found the fact that the Task Force ignored the public’s protests, and the lack of having a Victim’s Rights Advocate on your Task Force to be at the very least, irresponsible. I also felt that all of the vital concerns opposing this effort to open these reports, expressed to the Task Force were a real waste of our time and energy. The Task Force is not inclusionary, nor is it a fair representation of the members of our community. Who Mr. Rast is going to oversee the media when and if they get this open records policy passed? Are you going to stand by a rape victim whose name, address, and the details of her or his assault is reported in the Merc or Metro, by one of your cronies on the Task Force? Or are you going to stand by your position of “open government” is more important than a victim’s right to privacy? My hope is that the DA’s position on this issue is up held by the courts, for the sake of every victim I’ve worked with in the last 7 years because selling newspapers at such a high cost to victims is just despicable.
Mr.Bradley,
Maybe you can help us with the questions asked of Ed Rast? You both seem to be very knowledgable in this area?
TOM-NOTE THE MAJORITY OF REACTION TO YOUR FINE BLOG COMMENTS RELATE TO TRANSPORTATION AND BART. AT A MINIMUM, SOMEONE SHOULD SUGGEST A SECOND APPROACH IF THE RESOURCES TO FUND BART EXTENSIONS ARE SIMPLY NOT DOABLE. THERE IS NO NEED TO BELIEVE THAT BART/UNDERGROUND TRANSIT IS THE ONLY SOLUTION. ASIDE FROM COSTS, THE TIMING IS A MAJOR PROBLEM. A USE OF LIGHTRAIL MEETING BART LINES IS ONE POSSIBLE ANSWER. CHANGING FROM ONE FORM OF RAIL TRANSPORTATION TO ANOTHER A KEY STOPS IS NOT THE END OF THE WORLD. AND, THE BLIND DESIRE FOR A BART EXTENSION MAY SOUND GOOD, BUT THE TIME TO IMPLEMENT WILL NOT MEET THE TIMING OF THE PROBLEM EVEN IF THE PUBLIC ACCEPTS INCREASED SALES TAX…WHICH THEY WILL NOT DO IN MY OPINION.
Kathleen,
You missed my main point – I do not have the time to keep up with SJI discussions or read many posts but do occasionally
Only area I can not comment about is Sunshine since we are having ongoing public discussions We do not have all the information and have not come to final conclusions
SRTF clearly said none of our recommendations would violate existing laws or endanger victims or witnesses
Kathleen I am not your enemy and have been for open government, protecting privacy and protecting victims / witnesses and working to develop recommendations that accomplish all of them
You have expressed legitimate concerns I hope you come to Sunshine public meeting and tell entire task force your concerns or write us a letter or have someone else speak for you if you can not attend prior to our making final recommendations
Jan 17 meeting will cover public records but not police records and I will post for you the next Sunshine police records meeting on SJI when it is scheduled I am sure you have valid concerns
I only commented on VTA / BART because Eugene asked me to because I have a lot of transit experience and knowledge Will try to answer #38’s questions in next 1-2 week but if Eugene or Greg or someone else has accurate information please go ahead with my thanks
#43: The previous Earthquakes went downhill when they were bought by Anschutz Entertainment Group, a multinational event promoter which shuffled the team to the bottom of their priorities list. The new club is owned by a man with tons of local investments and is actually somewhat tied to the area. The team may actually have advertisements this time (how novel).
As for MLS, it’s 12 years old and already at the level of the lower Premiership. You say it’s not Chelsea, but that’s because MLS is focused on parity. Only four teams ever win anything in England. You can watch baseball for that kind of predictability. We saw in the ‘70s what money and superstars did for the Cosmos, but the league suffered as a result. I’d rather MLS field many solid clubs than a couple Chelseas and a bunch of crap.
Tom, Jan-2 I asked… If you were mayor . . .
Your answer: – check in next week for some of those answers and opinions on BART, et al.
This is a great discussion about a vision for the future, down town, MLB and a new century south bay. But if you were mayor today with today’s financial issues in this economy; what would you put at the top of your list that would have the greatest impact on restoring San Jose’s financial health and how would you do that? … that is if you were Mayor today. Thanks.
#54 Kathleen You make a powerful, well stated case for withholding discloser of certain records, and I’m sure there are many sides to this issue. You sound very knowledgeable and close this subject. Maybe you help me understand it a little better; see the bigger picture so to speak:
— What is the California State law on this issue as it relates generally and to the specific case types or anecdotes you describe?
— What is SJPD’s policy, position and practice regarding same as it relates to state law?
— And was Mr. Rast advocating anything contrary to State law or policy?
Oh by the way, wasn’t the discussion about BART, VTA and future transportation issues?
#55- David D. – I am a certified Mediator/Arbitrator, and am well versed in several areas of the law. Also, I work in Victim Offender Mediation, and served as a NAB Board Member and on the Council for several years. I spent a year on the Juvenile Justice Reform Committee as well. I have worked in Criminal Justice Field for the last 7 years, and do have a degree in Journalism.
Thank you for asking some very intelligent questions, questions I’d like to see Mr. Rast answer too because he and the Task Force are striving to change laws which presently provides great safe guards for victims, witnesses, and Police investigations practices.
So in answer to your question, “Was Mr. Rast advocating anything contrary to State law or policy?” yes, he and the Task Force are. The DA is presently challenging those requested changes based on several State Laws governing the changes they are asking to be made. My hope is that Ms. McCracken of the DA’s Office continues to fight these changes, so that victims and witnesses continue to come forward, and remain safe during and after Police investigations.
Now in fairness to Mr. Rast, I must say that he is not the driving force behind these proposed changes. He is the Chair of the Task Force. There are special interests groups that are involved here, but I’ll start with the Task Force members because I feel there is a definite conflict of interest involved here. There are several newspaper owners/representatives on the Task Force that are the driving force behind this venture. My understanding, or at least what these media folks are claiming is that they want these changes and more because the Police continually refuse their public information requests, or their requests are not met in a timely or thorough manner. Now if they were only asking for a change in present procedure to expedite requests, and if they were fighting to get more Police personnel to be hired so that the back log of requests could be better facilitated, I wouldn’t have a problem with that, but that is not the case. (In an effort to save time in explaining it, you can go to the City’s website and read all their recommended changes.)
While I was at the Sunshine Task Force public meeting, I heard the owner of the Metro publicly state that he also wanted access to juvenile criminal records too, which is presently prohibited. That and many other changes were discussed, dispite objections from professionals in the Criminal Justice System/Field. It was pretty sickening because it was as though all our objections and concerns were just blown off.
One of the special interest groups is the ACLU. They want more disclosure because they are trying to get tazers banned, and are trying to make a case for this by using Police reports and records. My personal belief is that they also want this information so they can sue the City, and the Police Department on tazer related deaths. The NAACP wants more disclosure so they can track and prove racial profiling, and also want tazers banned. All of which I personally believe will result in a lawsuit against the City of San Jose, and our Police Department too.
Now there is a beautiful young woman who’s father was killed during an altercation with the Police, I believe this past summer. The Police were called out to a motel for a public disturbance; somehow her father came out naked, fought with the Police, was tazed and died. The coroner’s report said the man’s death was undetermined because he had PCP and other drugs in him at the time of death. This young woman wants the Police report opened further because she wants closure, and to see if procedure was followed. I personally feel very bad for her, and hope she gets the closure she so badly needs.
There is the Independent Police Auditor who, in my personal opinion, is asking for Charter changes to increase her power, and is using every group and situation to get it. Then there is the usual menagerie of Police hating groups who would do anything and everything to create problems for the Police.
I hope that answers your questions. Now, I personally have grave concerns about victims and witness’s rights to privacy, and am very opposed to interfering with Police procedures, and investigations. I am also concerned about the way the media presently reports too much information on victims and witnesses in the paper. If even more disclosure is made to the media, who is going to oversee them to ensure the safety of these innocent victims and witnesses in crime? Secondly, it is already difficult enough to get victims and witnesses to come forward now, what will happen if their right to privacy is further jeopardized? As to tazers being banned, I am conflicted on this issue because a bullet sure as hell will kill you, but tazer deaths are rare in comparison.
Finally, my issue with Mr. Rast is that he is the Chair of the Task Force and some months ago, he posted a long thread on his Task Force and opening Police Records etc. Many SJI bloggers wrote in asking questions, questions he never bothered to answer. I find that just wrong of him. And when confronted by me in this thread, he went from Ethical Conduct restrictions to “I’m too busy,” but he’d be happy to come back and post more dribble for me. No thanks. Hum~
David – If I were king again, ah, I mean Mayor, the answer is simple but not easy. In the cycle of boom and bust, you must restrain spending ( salaries, pensions, and services) to provide for the inevitable downturn. Fees and new charges ( taxes) and new services ( nice but dangerous) are not the answer. In my last yr. I paid off the police and fire overtime of millions, restrained pension/salary growth, and put 30 million dollars in the contingency fund. My predecessor, Janet Gray Hayes, left me pretty well off too – Gonzales, Gov. Davis, the State Legislature, and, unfortunately, Gov.Arnold, have not learned that lesson( although Arnold tried for structural change but was sabotaged) – what goes up; comes down – prepare for it. TMcE
Kathleen,
There is another Blog you might be better off talking to regarding the police files, “SV411”. This Blog is run by another Sunshine Task Force Member and Vice-Chair.Dan Pulcrano. Read SV411,“Form of Protest”. Also,” What They Dont Know”.
I believe these Police files are sealed by law and the final say is left up to the City attorney. I don`t know how far anyone will get trying to open these files.
I learned a lot from Ed Rast`s response on Standard American Rail which sent me searching on this issue. Eugene Bradley, Greg Perry are very informative on the BART issue all answering many of my questions.
I wish Greg Perry would put more information on S J I .
#59- Thanks for the 411 Richard, I really appreciate your taking the time to share this info with me. FYI- Dan Pulcrano is the owner of the Metro. Anything he has to say on the subject of opening Police records is suspect, and I’ve already heard enough of his one sided views on this topic. I think bloggers on SJI do care about this topic, and had Mr. Rast not done another one of his drive by postings I wouldn’t have brought it up on this column.
Have a great weekend, and thank you again, that was very kind of you~
#52- You are very mistaken Mr. Rast, this is not personal for me at all so your reference of not being my enemy is a bit over the top. I do not approve of the way you have represented yourself on this blog. On the one hand you say you are too busy to follow up on your posts, and then you state,” I am limited as Chair Sunshine and to comply with Sunshine’s Code Of Conduct and Ethics about what I can discuss about Sunshine outside Sunshine public meetings.” I find that to be a contradiction that bears addressing.
You are not on a Task Force that is exempt from the Brown Act so you are most certainly accountable as the Chair to those of us in the public. You are not a Victim’s Rights Advocate, so your work on this Task Force on such a vital issue concerns me. You may not be allowed to make statements on behalf of the Task Force, but I feel your postings of those meetings and ducking questions is a debatable practice. You ARE allowed a personal opinion on the issue as a private citizen, and I think you should have enough integrity to do so if you’re going to post here. The Task Force is not allowed to meet in private so I don’t think you get the point I’m making. I see your repeated attempts at dodging the issues to be lacking in integrity. You can dance around it all you want Mr. Rast, but I see your actions and behavior in responding to my comments as face saving and condescending to the intelligence of we very informed and educated bloggers here on SJI.
Unless I’m mistaken, you do not have a law degree, nor have you any expertise in working with victims or offenders. So while you may claim compassion for victims, which you might honestly have, I do not think you have a clue of the damage you will be doing to victims by pushing for the opening of Police reports that you are seeking. I have worked with victims and offenders and I can tell you from a position of expertise and education that criminals are far from stupid. They learn the legal system and use it to their advantage to harm innocent people, to harm witnesses, to find ways around getting caught, and if you honestly think these very intelligent criminals will not use open records and investigation practices by the Police, care of the wonderful Sunshine Task Force, to further their ability to become even better at avoiding being caught, and or prosecuted you are living in a fantasy world Mr. Rast.
You can continue to side step my ethical concerns about the members of the Task Force that are representatives/owners of the media, and who have a great vested interest in the outcome of this volatile issue, but I can assure you members of the public are not obtuse enough to believe your Task Force has any real altruistic reason for pursuing this policy change. We are very clear about what and whom is driving this forward.
I watched and listened very carefully to the Task Forces reaction to opposition on the opening of records Mr. Rast. You guys listened with the compassion of drying paint when Rape Counselors begged you not to do this because this would harm victims. Further, it was clear you guys had your minds made up before any of us opened our mouths. It was also apparent to all of us that you were holding this public meeting simply because the law requires you to do so. So thanks but no thanks Mr. Rast to your kind and condescending invitation to:
1.)Post more of the Task Forces meetings dates and times on SJI for me. I’m intelligent enough to look on the City’s website for the information myself.
2.)Watch your Task Force strive to open records that will hurt victims, hurt juveniles, interfere with the duties of our fine Police Officers and investigators, and assist criminals in their endeavors of hurting innocent citizens everywhere.
Have a great weekend Mr. Rast. Peace~
Johnmichael,
Did you learn anything from mr Rast about the rail system in our valley. Three people, Eugene Bradley, Greg Perry and Ed Rast have presented a side of the BART story that few have dared to speek out about. Another is Don Gage from Morgan Hill. These people all seem to get bashed just because they dare to speek out intelligently about the sidfe of VTA and BART that the endorcers of BART have chosen to keep away from residents.
I have taken information each of them have given us and gone online to research on. You and I are unhappy about the conditions of our roads, but guess what, guess why they don`t get fixed? It seems like every penny that can decietfully be drained off from “City,County,State and Federal Government funds seems to find it`s way into the VTA/BART/Measure A, bank account, then it dissapears.
For example I went on line and found VTA payroll records and found 79 buss drivers making over $87,000 a year. They call this management, we are supposed to listen to these people tell us why we should take a tax increase to support the BART endorcement group? Compare this to a school teachers salary. Do these bus drivers have college loans to pay off before they can drive a bus? Scholl teachers have college loans and get paid so very little?
Read the CATO and FTA reports on VTA/BART, there on line, do they make the news papers, I don`t think so. I wonder why?
Ask your friends a simple question,” weill we be better off in Santa Clara County if we build BART, will our roads get fixed and our grid lock problems be solved?
These people dare to bring the missing facts to us, and they get bashed. Wake up and smell the coffee.
Interesting conversation thread; Tom posts some comments on BART, San Jose and the future. Questions are asked, someone answers, and out of the blue a food fight over something totally unrelated.
In a heated political race for an elected position I can understand it; passions run deep and emotions are near the surface.
When folks are trying to understand an issue as complex and costly as SCC transportation and SJ City solvency, it would be nice to stay on track (no pun intended).
Tom and John had the courage to provide the format and raise the subject, and I find that more enlightening than what the Metro or Mercury have provided. Thanks guys… and posters.
Tom, You summed it nicely. Seems so simple, common sense and obvious; but with today’s divide-n-conquer, take no prisoners politics for carving up the pie, it’s a wonder anything is left to cover expanding requirements of our growing city.
I sometimes wonder different we are from the Green Zone government in Iraq. Maybe it’s a few degrees of civility.
Tom,
You made a important statement,” When we look for solutions to our transportation and traffic needs, it is important that we do not “destroy the village to save it”.
If something isn`t done soon about our traffic gridlock problems in this valley our village could end up looking like a gost town that once was.
If you were an employeer of a large firm would you want to bring your employees here with all our grid lock problems, (that are about to get worse),with our roadways in the condition their in, with our increasing taxes, lack of parks,our trails be purchased by developers for more high density development. A city Gov`t that cuts year after year and now more cuts projected into the year 2010. The City of San Jose is in the service business and we are cutting City services.
Our neighboring cities are our competitors, they are growing, have good city services, lower hotel and sales taxes, and brag that they are a lot safer than their neighbor San Jose is.why are they growing, why are they getting new jobs(compare Palo Alto,Mt View to San Jose).
Ask yourself why there are so many Hotels sitting on our rim just outside our city limits. There are 27 hotels between Santa Clara and Milpitas sitting right out side our city limit line, yes Milpitas a town we used to make fun of. look at the new auto row in Milpitas, Piercy Toyota just left san Jose to join Milpitas dealers right on the edge of our city. Shopping centers, why are there so many of the big ones sitting right on the edge of our city, outside our city limits.
Why are there so many empty tilt ups “empty” sitting in the san Jose Portion of the Golden Triangle. Why are all the new BioTech companies building up in Warm Springs and Union City and not San Jose?
Another important question Tom, why doesn`t san Jose have a chamber of Commerce like Santa Clara, Sunnyvale,Mt.View,Palo Alto, Campbell and Morgan Hill have ? Good question no one wants to ask.
When a new company is thinking of locating in the southbay, “the BioTech`s the “new solar energy group” and they go to the Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce, they see a chamber that represents all our neighboring Cities as well as us, how can SVCC push San Jose to these new developing companies. Do you think the SVCC can give San Jose it sole sales efforts?
Go back to City services, the City needs revenue to pay it`s bills and provide services to its residents, and give a San Jose Chamber the marketing tools it needs to bring new jobs to our city. We have been saying we are the safest city in the nation of a city of our size. Guess what our neighboring chambers have been telling new companies or companies wanting to expand that they are a whole lot safer than San Jose. Palo Alto,Mt View,Santa Clara, Milpitas and Sunnyvale`s chambers have been telling these companies that they are a lot safer than San Jose.They tell them you can walk in our downtown at night, not true about portions of downtown San Jose.
Look at all the revenue we`ve lost to those hotels sitting just outside our rim. They advertize themselves as being the San Jose Shearton etc each of them and say they are just 5 miles from the San Jose Airport.In Warm Springs they say we~re just 11 miles to the San Jose Airport, and they sit in Milpitas santa Clara and Warm Springs, why, why is this happening to our village?
Eugene Bradley,
I would like to take you up on your offer to help me come up with a “new” list of top ten or 12 questions for VTA/BART. Maybe Greg Perry, Don Gage and Ed Rast and Tom McEnery could help too.
Just tap on my name printed in green to reply gentlemen.
New Forbes Report January 13, 2008
City with the “highets cost of living in the U.S.A., San Jose Ca. #1
Top Five Cities in the USA for Jobs,” Salt Lake City,Wichata, Austin, Atlanta,Fort Worth.
Didn`t many of our Cities HiTech accounting jobs go to Austin,Tx.?
Don’t ya just love the irony of Mr. Rast telling us, after he spouts off about something, that he can’t talk about anything he alleged ‘cuz he’s on the SUNSHINE task Force? With that kind of sunshine, we’d all best have lots of batteries for our flashlights if we want to shine a light on anything.
Kathleen Flynn,
What is so suspect about the metro, metro and owner and the police. Please fill us in.
The metro has been a great part of our city for years. Dan P, although a little odd, has been a big supporter of downtown; especially small businesses. So please fill us in.
Thanks in advance!
#63- Metro Fan, I read the Metro every week, that’s not my point. Dan odd, that’s putting it mildly!
Richard suggested I read Dan’s blog on the subject of opening Police records and investigations, I said no because Dan is a major force behind opening these records, which I oppose. (Please read my posts, I think I explained my reasons clearly.)
Dan has a vested financial interest in opening these reports, so anything he has to say on the subject is mute to me. It’s like putting a fox in charge of the hen house. Further, I object to the conflict of interest I see on that Task Force, as well as, the fact that no one on that Task Force has any Police, or Victim Advocacy training or expertise. The proposed changes they want will hurt a lot of people, and help criminals victimize innocent people, more than they do now. But one thing those changes will do of course is sell more papers, get the Metro more ads, and interfere with the Police and their investigations.
As to off topic comments gentlemen, if you look at all the blogs on here, many times conversations lead to other topics, and it is not a crime guys so lighten up. The topic you’re on will take many years to come to pass~
#69 Kathleen
Regarding your concerns about SJPD disclosures:
—What is the California State law on this issue as it relates generally and to the specific case types or anecdotes you describe?
—What is SJPD’s policy, position and practice regarding same as it relates to state law?
—And was Mr. Rast advocating anything contrary to State law or policy?
I understand your anecdotal issues and concerns and I whole heartedly agree. But what does that have to do with the current state law and SJPD policy, position and practice?
Your posts are truly well stated and most interesting, and I don’t believe you’re a “hit-n-run” blogger here; so, can you answer the questions about the subject that you raised? Thanks.
#70- Sorry David D. I’m not sure I really understand what exactly you’re asking. If I think I’m correct in assuming you want me to quote you the law on this issue, what you are asking would require me to write an entire legal brief on the subject!
Once again, if you go to the City’s website, go to the Sunshine Task Force, you can read everything on this issue including the DA’s brief on these proposed changes. It will answer all your questions about State Law inquires you have, the District Attorney’s, and the Police Department’s position on this topic. The DA’s Office is fighting these changes because the Task Force, Ed Rast included, are most certainly asking that Police policy, and disclosure laws be changed.
That is, I’m afraid, the best answer I can give you. I appreciate your interest, and can only say that you will need to do some research of your own. JMO can bear me out on this, that there are too many laws governing right to privacy, etc. for me to address them on this blog! I sure wish it were that easy! I can say this; the Police and Sheriff’s Office do oppose these changes, as they testified at the Task Force meeting too.
Tom,
I know we have many priorities, but try to imagine the $50 million a year obligation VTA will make to BART, “just to become a member of BART for life??
Tom, can you imagine all the things you can do with $50 million for life if it was given to you to develop downtown ?
Maybe we could get rid of the “tent” at the convention center and make it a world class center, then convince the Apple Exec`s to hold the “Mac World” show in downtown San Jose. Just think of what the city could do with that money?
If you had that kind of commitment, and you were mayor, would you give it to the BART group up north ?
First, Mr McEnery:
I’m writing this on BART right now, going to my job in SF.
You are playing on a huge myth in your piece, the idea that “downtown merchants of San Jose in the sixties… opposed the connection to BART and San Francisco.”
In fact, San Jose and Santa Clara County were never even offered the choice of participating in the BART consortium. Marin County opted out, as did San Mateo County, where merchants (like those in charge of Hillsdale and Serramonte shopping center) feared that their businesses would be eroded significantly if Peninsula families could easily ride into Union Square for SF shopping. (When BART expanded deeper into San Mateo County and SFO later, it cost the county a fortune to build the line and ‘buy-in.’ I believe they own and pay to maintain their portion of the track, too.)
San Jose, at the time of BART’s planning and design, had a population well under 100,000 and was largely a farming community with a couple high tech businesses around (HP, IBM, Intersil, Fairchild, etc.) and no concrete commercial or “human transit” reasons to connect to SF and Oakland other than going to see the Opera or Symphony from time to time. Certainly not hundreds of thousands of commuters like today.
No doubt, Santa Clara County should be part of BART, and as the area exploded our forefathers of the 70s and 80s should have had the foresight to get on the expansion map decades before we did. And Alameda County should share some of the cost since their residents and property values will benefit the most. Far greater numbers of Alameda County residents will travel south than we San Joseans who commute north.
#33 Mr Z: BART is much faster from my home in Alum Rock. I drive 30 minutes to Fremont, and if my timing is right, 50 minutes after that I’m at work on Market St in SF. The same play with Caltrain takes me two hours, even if I catch the bullet train, because after I get to SF I have to take Muni, which stinks, in addition to taking 680/280 to Diridon or Tamien Stations.
My BART ticket from Fremont is $10.50 r/t following the recent fare increase. Caltrain is $15 r/t and I haven’t even paid for Muni yet ($1.75 each way)!!!
If BART came further south (Milpitas, Berryessa) I could ride a bike to catch it, and it would only add an additional 10 minutes to the BART trip (while stripping time from the car ride—puttering through the streets of Fremont is half the time between my house near SJCC and the station deep into Fremont). So, it depends where you’re coming from.
And the biggest hindrance of VTA light rail is the lack of grade separation and its slow pace, not busses and parking lots.
I would support *two* different trains on the Peninsula, if only because Caltrain runs adjacent to El Camino Real and isn’t always near job sites by 101. A previous painful commute to Mariner’s Island Blvd in San Mateo still smarts for that very reason—no connection for the “back-haul.” Having the two in parallel would be marvelous. I understand from the MTC meeting regarding high speed rail that I attended in August that 101 itself was built on a rail right-of-way. So there’s not exactly room for BART or anything else there. Point is, the idea of an additional train is not a dumb concept any more than having 101 and 280 both run up the Peninsula is.
In the least, bring BART to Berryessa and skip the tunneling for now. That’s where all the cost is. If light rail is so good as VTA boosters contend, a connection at the Great Mall will be all we need, right?
I know I’m in the minority—most folks either hate all rail or love it. I like BART, but Light Rail is ridiculous.
#71 Kathleen,
I couldn`t agree with you more about Dan! I think he should stick to his specialties, entertainment and Porn.
John S. Leyba writes “In the least, bring BART to Berryessa and skip the tunneling for now. That’s where all the cost is. If light rail is so good as VTA boosters contend, a connection at the Great Mall will be all we need, right?”
This might be a reasonable compromise, because most of the horrid price of the BART as currently envisioned by VTA goes into the subway portion of the project. Building BART to Milpitas and a connection with the existing light rail system might be possibe with the existing sales tax revenue.
Also, would Kathleen Flynn and David D please take their pissing contest off-line. Nobody gives a damn anymore.
#75, Thanks. Glad you consider that a reasonable compromise.
BART is already on the board to go to Warm Springs, with Alameda County and federal dollars. BART is just waiting to see what will happen with the SJ plans so they can source everything at the same time and keep costs down. Ironically, this wait-and-see game is probably costing money as materials and labor costs continue to skyrocket.
Unlike the crappy compromise that is light rail (downsides of a bus crossed with downsides of a train), w/r/t BART, an incremental push would not be that bad and would serve a lot of the purposes—SJ residents could take transit easily up the East Bay. If you want to go up the Peninsula to SF, that option is already there.
And Alameda County residents could get to their jobs in North SJ, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Milpitas, etc.
The airport shuttle already takes people from the LR station to the airport it should have gone through in the first place, and then over to Santa Clara Caltrain—things the new BART line would supposedly “connect.”
The only thing missing from a compromise is being able to take BART to Five Wounds Church and East Santa Clara Street. Something tells me this isn’t really high on most people’s priority list.
Compromise, anyone?!?!
John, the problem with the BART “compromise” is that nobody’s talking about it except us. Carl and the “SVLG” stubbornly wants the whole thing and refuses to consider alternatives. Carl wants for us to pay for it even though his members would “benefit” more than SCC residents would.
I still think Bay Rail’s proposal is better than a BART extension, though
BART isn’t ready to do Warm Springs. VTA had to loan them money to keep the project alive.
Security for the loan? “Profits” from the SFO extension. (The same one that nearly bankrupted Samtrans.)
#73 John,
You might consider purchasing a CalTrain monthly pass. This gives you unlimmited rides to and from San Francisco to san Jose or reverce. the cost is $198 per month. In you use 40 round trips your cost is $4.87 per round trip or $2.43 each way. Use it every day and round trips drop to $3.31 each.
My son takes the express to San Francisco from Dirdon Station and it takes him 45min to make the trip. There are more than 0ne express trains on Cal Train.
Light rail is slow because it makes to many stops. Ridership would increase if LR had express trains and larger parking lots.
Light Rail runs on Standard American Gage tracks. It could have run on the exhisting Union Pacific tracks.
If San Jose built BART to the east bay and didn`t make the estimated ridership which was a pedded number and had to pay the $50 million to join BART, there is a good chance costs would brake or bankrupt VTA and we would lose our VTA bus service and all other VTA programs.
Tom,
If you were Mayor of San Jose today and you were given a choice of making a commitment of $50 million a year to BART or San Jose/Santa Clara County, which program would you endorce and why ?
#75-Also, would Kathleen Flynn and David D please take their pissing contest off-line. Nobody gives a damn anymore.
Posted by Hugh Jardonn in San Jose
Hugh, you are not the Editor of this blog, and your comments are out of line here. David D. asked some honest questions that deserved an answer. May be you don’t find this topic worth discussing but others on this blog do. So in future, if you don’t like what is being said on here, please feel free to exercise your right to skip over our posts and read someone else’s. In other words, try being respectful of other people’s opinions, and their right to express them.
#75 – Hugh Jardonn –
I take offense to you trying to control conversations you don’t like. Just because you don’t like what Kathleen Flynn and David D. are speaking about doesn’t mean you have the right to speak for the rest of us. I for one, was enjoying reading the exchange of thoughts, and ideas,before you rudely referred to it as a pissing contest. If you don’t like a particular conversation, you can just ignore it.
#75, 82, 83
Pissing contest? I don’t think so. I just got back from seeing the doctor. I told him I have water on the knee. After a thorough examination, he informed me that my aim is bad.
#75, Hugh and John
Any compromise would mean we would still have to join BART as a member, $50million a year for life.
Milpitas to Warm Springs “only 6 miles”, yes a lower cost to build, but we would still have to join the BART system for life. Why pay #50 million for such a short trip ?
Santa Clara County has some very serious traffic problems that are about to get worse. Read the Mr. Road Show story about the 12 worse freeways in the Merc. Interstate 880 to Alameda County didn`t make the top 12 list.
We need to take care of our own problems in Santa Clara County first.
Richard #66 asks:“Ask yourself why there are so many Hotels sitting on our rim just outside our city limits. ” As I recall, a policy initiated in the McEnery years prohibited new hotels except in the downtown core. I am unsure if that policy remains in place today, but it was for a long time; thus pushing hotels, and their sales tax & TOT $$ to other cities.
John #73 said:“BART is much faster from my home in Alum Rock. I drive 30 minutes to Fremont, and if my timing is right, 50 minutes after that I’m at work on Market St in SF. ” And if your timing is not right, sir? Then how long does it take. And you’ve omitted the time to get from your car to the BART platform, and undoubtedly the spare time you must allot in case the drive takes over 30 minutes. I’d bet your average time is close to 2 hours each way. Doesn’t sound like RAPID transit to me. I can drive from Willow Glen to SF in an hour.