Saturday, April 20, 2013

The bike lobby at work saving the planet

Jeffrey Tumlin

The folks at ENUF send this for our consideration:

Let us consider looking into some of the relationship issues between the SFMTA and their contractors and the lobbyists. Then let us consider writing some letters describing what we have found.

How many masters can one man serve at a time?

Has Jeffrey Tumlin been working for SPUR, the Bicycle Coalition, and this bicycle lobbyist all along?

Look at the the list of people that the lobbyist is sending information to. Evidence suggests that Tumlin has been working with bicycle lobbyists at the state level to enact legislation that would allow them to financially benefit from the placement of parking meters in San Francisco.
Dave Snyder

And is Andy Thornley working for Serco or the people of San Francisco?

Labels: , , , ,


At 6:11 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

Is this the same Jeffrey Tumlin that is the SFMTA speaker shown here being stumped after comments at community meeting?...

At 9:12 AM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

Somebody calling himself "John Smith" sent me this email:

Hi Rob -

I saw your recent post on Jeffrey Tumlin and his connection with the SF Bicycle Coalition, SPUR and Nelson Nygaard, and the CAL Bike Lobby. Did you know there was also a subcontract agreement between Serco and wait for it...Jeffrey Tumlin? Yes he was supposed to be the "independent contractor" who evaluated the SFpark program.


How many people does this guy work for? This sub-contract was obtained through the sunshine act.

Rob's comment: So what? Unless you can show that there's some kind of conflict of interest, there's something ugly about these anonymous attacks on Tumlin. This post was just to show how busy and ubiquitous the anti-car bike lobby is. I disagree with their agenda, but I don't see anything illegal or immoral in what these folks are doing.

Besides, that you make these pseudo-accusations---is there an actual accusation buried somewhere in these documents?---under the cover of anonymity automatically detracts from your credibility.

At 3:41 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

"John Smith" sent this comment to my email address:

This is where it gets messy. SERCO has been running the show since the beginning. Serco hired Andy Thornley, and Lauren Mattern as Anaylsts. Neither one of them filed proper disclosures with the city.

Serco then subcontracted with Jeffrey Tumlin at Nelson\Nygaard to assisted with the creation of a parking policy framework and enabling legislation.

Jeff Tumlin was supposed to have have conducted a thorough evaluation of the SFpark Project at the conclusion of the Federally sponsored demonstration Pilot. So, where are the results of the evaluation?

1. Develop a detailed pilot projects implementation plan
2. Review SFMTA's pilot project data collection and evaluation plan
3. Assist with development of a survey plan
4. Residential parking pilot concepts development and implementation plan
5. Management of Disabled parking
6. Contingency and Support, etc.

Serco basically hired one of their own employees to dothe "independent evaluation" of the SFpark program.They made it appear that the program [is] a great success. The larger ethical issue is that these consultants may have been passing themselves off as SFMTA employees while promoting parking meter placements that will ultimately make more money for their private employer (along with the City) but also the privatization of a public resource aided and abetted by the disguised outsourcing of public functions to a private company that not only makes money off its consulting function but which influences decisions to put in place new policies, legislation, and meters that will continue to make it more money in the future.

There are multiple levels of deception that have all been aided and abetted by the SFMTA.

Just my opinion. Hope this helps!

At 3:48 PM, Blogger Rob Anderson said...

Yes, that's a little better, though your anonymity is still bothersome. And in the future post your comments directly to District 5 Diary instead of sending them to my email address.

The operative word in your case seems to be "may." You've only claimed that there may be some hanky-panky here; you haven't proven it.

Ultimately it's the MTA and City Hall that are responsible if there's any wrongdoing in this program. Meanwhile, it's fair to say that the whole parking meter program is essentially another money-raising project for a bloated MTA bureaucracy that has more than 5,000 employees.

With that many people bumping into each other at the Van Ness Ave. office, it's hard to understand why they have to hire "consultants" to do anything.


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home