Huffington Post gets it wrong---again

Even the picture is wrong, since it shows a mountain
biker on Twin Peaks, not a cyclist on the Panhandle

 

Like its contemptible piling on of Ross Mirkarimi early this year, the Huffington Post continues to get city issues wrong. Its latest piece on the Fell/Oak bike lane project is full of misinformation. For openers there has been no "lawsuit" filed, just an appeal to the Board of Supervisors of the MTA's approval of the project.

 

And this distortion about a sensible, realistic alternative to the Panhandle project:

 

Earlier this year, the Haight Ashbury Improvement Association proffered its own alternative to the Fell/Oak bikeways that would have pushed the lanes further out from the Panhandle and onto Page and Hayes Streets. That plan received little traction as it seemed unlikely that bikers would climb the hill required to get onto Page or travel a few blocks in the wrong direction to access Hayes. 

The sensible proposal didn't get any "traction" because the bike people and their enablers in City Hall are now making traffic policy for the city. There are in fact no significant hills on Page Street,  except between Broderick and Divisadero, and both Page Street and Hayes Street are only one block from the Panhandle.

The Bicycle Coalition's Shahum talks about the "strong support" this project has, but that's never been tested, since the "community outreach" meetings held by the MTA were only a pro forma process that the city has to go through before implementing projects. Why not put the project on the ballot to find out how much public support the project has? Back in 2004 the city allowed residents of Page Street to vote on the Page Street traffic circles, which were rejected by both residents and the fire department.

Of course the city won't take that chance with any of the bicycle projects, though they really should put both the Bicycle Plan and Critical Mass on the ballot to let city voters have a say.



That'll be the day!

Nudist creeps try to bully San Francisco

Photo: Nelson Estrada, SF Weekly

Supervisor Scott Wiener is quoted in the LA Times:

"In its traditional form in San Francisco, public nudity was fine," said Supervisor Scott Wiener, who represents the Castro District and introduced both ordinances. "It was fine to have a random [naked] person walking through the neighborhood once in a while. It was fine at public festivals and parades." But although many talk about the tolerant "spirit of San Francisco," Wiener said, "what's happening now is…a caricature."

No, public nudity in San Francisco was not "fine" before the latest kerfuffle. The rest of us just stay away from the Folsom Street Fair and the Bay to Breakers. Many would still like to see the exhibitionists that sully the Bay to Breakers race busted for indecency. 

People expect to see naked people and vulgarity at the Folsom Street Fair---that's why they attend the event---but why should runners and their friends and families be subjected to that exhibitionism by a minority of creeps?

Wiener is a caricature of a San Francisco legislator, with his ridiculous half-measure last year that failed to deal realistically with the exhibitionists in the Castro.

The exhibitionists will try to stop enforcement of Wiener's belated attempt to restrict public nudity---if passed by the Board of Supervisors---by claiming that making them wear clothes in public is somehow a violation of their free speech rights!

More importantly, Wiener has introduced legislation to restrict the public's right to appeal City Hall projects under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which even the Sierra Club is opposing.

Of course the "progressives" at the Bay Guardian support the exhibitionists. Tim Redmond thinks the free speech claim is "a pretty good argument," but he also thinks graffiti/tagging vandalism is nothing but "involuntary public art"!  

These creeps are following the example set by Critical Mass, since a minority of bike people have been bullying the people of San Francisco on the last Friday of the month for 20 years.