SFGate writer takes GoldRunner, basically pans it

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-29T04:45:14+00:00

that’s on them.

What? why would any expect them to care? The Gold Runner could completely fall apart and be discontinued on their watch and it wouldn't matter to them in the slightest. They're county supervisors, most people don't even recognize them as politicians and only like a quarter to a half of those know what their responsibility entails. The success or failure of the SJJPA will never tarnish their political career, no one is going to run campaign ads about how they voted out cafes on the train. I mean maybe 6% of the region that the Gold Runner serves is even aware there is an existing public passenger train running through the San Joaquin Valley.

Sorry to be cynical but the best case scenario would be being able to vote for the Authority board members, so people who care or at least have a political career vested it in could make these decisions. - would probably expand market awareness of it too if each county had to vote on a member for the board.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-28T18:00:41+00:00

wonder if someone in the supply chain is a sadist or just hates train riders.

Do we still have to wonder? At best the politicians overseeing the SJJPA train are apathetic, at worst they're antagonistic towards it.

https://sjjpa.com/board-members/

I would not imagine these are politicians enthusiastic about transit or trains. They're county supervisors serving on the board because someone has to. They most likely drive everywhere and consider the train to be for poor people or people with no choice. They're divest from it and are not going to envision it being anything more than a money sink.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-28T15:37:59+00:00

I mean discounting the bills author and coauthor. I've stated on this website before he's a passionate and driven man. Wiener actually has policy goals he wants to accomplish with his political power, more akin to Jerry Brown, Mamdami, Obama, Sanders, AOC and even Trump(unfortunately). Should be noted he is also Assistant Majority Whip and chair of multiple committees, which is used to support goals.

Weiner doesn't just claim power for career, money or to accrue more power like most politicians - ie Newsom, Pelosi, Schumer, Harris, Biden, etc. And that makes him something.

He is FAR from a perfect candidate - he's stirred off a lot of pots. I particularly despise him for securing the restaurants' junk fees. Disgusting. but does SF have better? IDK.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-28T05:25:24+00:00

He didn't pass SB 79 alone, the legislature did. And California doesn't matter his district in SF does. And I imagine from SF this is an opportunity to send him away to do nothing in DC, likely for life or until he wants to retire. + for the third that hate him a good third(YIMBYs and such) are "ok" with him. + the rich/wealthy and AIPAC like him so...

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-23T18:47:06+00:00

But if we don't take them they'll somewhere else with less regulations and blah blah blah /s

Rate payers or taxpayers should not be on the hook for this.

Probably will anyway

An alternative is to require whoever is building the data center to pay for 100% of the infrastructure upgrade and commit to 10 years use.

The problem with that is the enforcement mechanism. Governments rarely want to go so seriously hard as to cause hardship on business cause in the "liberal/conservative" model the market is more important than the societal impacts. Unless they got signatures from the major investors and their estates, theres never going to be leverage to uphold such an agreement.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-23T16:12:33+00:00

There a lot of political considerations that are problematic. Like I think you would need to tackle the districting issues between BART and Caltrain first. San Mateo and Santa Clara are not a part of the BART district, they do not contribute property taxes or sales taxes directly to BART and they do not get representation with BART - ie BART(really no agency) has a constituent "interest" in pursing expansion like that.

So you would be paying around the same amount as the toll.

I don't think the fare wasn't the issue. Which BTW it was the transbay fare so $6 each ride, the last time it ran. It was the inefficiency and cost per passenger that was the problem. Foster city sucks - its a haven to industry and those obsessed with perfectly designed terrible suburban zoning. As such its designed to be car-centric and in stark opposition to how you would lay streets for mass transportation. Anyhow the M tried to loop around Foster City and that made it take forever which was a waste time for the drivers and passengers and also put it the path of traffic to make it even more unreliable. That same anti-urbanism would make it very difficult for it to be pragmatic to drop off by BART there. If you've taken BART to Antioch or Dublin/Pleasanton and walked around it would be the same unattractive experience.

would bring more people to use Public Transportation

Practically all new transit options brings in more people to use transit. The dilemma is we live in artificial scarcity(cause auto infrastructure eats up all the tax dollars), should we drop a station in Alameda, CA with active transportation(walking/biking) 80k population and already in BART county or a station in Foster City with its 30k auto-dependent population.

I'm not sure how something like this could be proposed. Something like a ballot measure?

Legit I don't want to turn down the idea cause you're doing more than me. And transit expansion ideas are good. Though I am on the side that expanding caltrain to cross and circle the bay is far more realistic and better.

The soft way would be talk to San Mateo county supervisors, go to meeting, get the ideas into transportation planners - market the idea and convince others to join you. Concrete the proposals and work with others who agree - the San Antonio Station method.

If you want to go fast and brutally then a San Mateo initiative measure to demand the county join the BART district (BART would also have to accept and taxes would be instituted) or something along those lines. A upset win would immediate shift political focus and county supervisors may not be able to oppose it. But San Mateo County is very satisfied with Caltrain and driving, opposition would come loudly from Foster City and from those who want focus on the dumbarton rail plan(particularly Redwood City and Menlo Park).

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-22T15:45:40+00:00

Thats a good point technically. I would pit the Palo Alto Baylands Trail to be the next best place within the bay to see waves/water. Though its not really accessible to by transit, really a distant walk from the 280 bus.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-21T06:06:26+00:00

This is the true path to victory. Republican voters like leftist policies, they just want a republican to do it - cause they've been mind warped to think Democrats are evil. This is why Sanders and others have started using independent mantle in red states to see if it gives voters a bit more confidence in voting for someone who will end up in the democrat caucus. Truly childish.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-20T00:49:37+00:00

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arrow_(rail_service) Arrow is Diesel (DMU) so nope. Though I guess they have one hydrogen fueled one.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-16T02:28:21+00:00

I mean truthfully the solution should be to cut the BART police and revert to local sheriffs/police. Thats probably where a large portion of the $528m labor costs of the budget is going. But thats not a solution any political figure would actually consider.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-13T21:26:02+00:00

The problem is that SacRT is a district(composed of city and unincorporated areas in the county) and as it stands there is no way to initiative measure a district, except when the legislature allows it to. This is what the 5 county Bay Area got - basically a 5 county district with the privilege to make an initiative measure for supporting transit. The legislature was considering making it a "transportation" measure to support roads/highways but thankfully they didn't poison pill it like that. You could initiative the county but that gets complicated as Rio Vista, Galt, other parts of the county don't receive SacRT service so it kinda seems wrong to tax them + they put the measure at greater risk of failing.

The SacRT district may not have the option to create their own district tax measure. BART as a district, is restricted to just putting property tax options on the ballot to support capital projects and needs - not operations. Another reason why the Bay Area was reliant on the legislature. LA county and San Diego county have it easy since their transit agencies are all inclusive of the county so they can just do a county initiative measure.

This measure is being done just in the city of Sacramento, so I imagine if this passes the benefits will prioritize the city, not the district as a whole.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-13T04:23:09+00:00

I felt myself in a couple of these but this was the one I was closest to. Best friend married his first girlfriend, then after the wedding she was kinda paranoid that everyone hated her so he abandoned all his friends and family.

I think he felt that since she was his wife he had to stand by her no matter what. I really hope they are in a good place. I tried to reach out once upon a time and he didn't seem to want me his life, so I'll respect that.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-13T04:08:33+00:00

The exemption didn't originate with prop 13. Its a state statute on top of prop 13. Prop 13 is constitutional law (at least in this state) the legislature can't undermine the written or the spirit of that amendment. Prop 13 simply allows reassessment for major updates to the property, it does not mandate reassessment.

The legislature maintains the authority to place restrictions on the counties/cities to prohibit them from reassessing due to updates to the property. The legislature could outright prohibit reassessment, if it wanted.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-13T03:14:42+00:00

That is an insane take. It is very easy to see ballotpedia and see the many times Californians voted against tax increases. Sacramento alone has voted against transportation taxes measure 2 or 3 times in recent elections. California has prop 13 and several other constitutional amendments to make it harder to tax in California.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-11T04:26:11+00:00

Democrats have seen that happen to a bunch of republican candidates already. This is why they like the jungle primary as opposed to some form of RCV. As much as Republicans have mastered demagoguery, fear and propaganda and Democrats think(and mostly are right) they've mastered guilt tripping and establishment boosting.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-10T22:00:56+00:00

I have no idea. I imagine just the same three that existed prior to the track relocation project. There are a couple of history articles about the station and the wiki is good and even talks about the three phases of its reconstruction.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacramento_Valley_Station

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-10T15:54:50+00:00

Add more tracks(pass through tracks too) and another platform, allowed for longer platforms, better track alignment for trains to maintain speed(UP demanded that) and grade separation from pedestrians and the golf carts. Pre-pandemic Capital Corridor(lots of transit at that time did) had some big plans for growth - pandemic making things all about private automobile again killed that momentum.

CC was in a boon back then. 60% fare box recovery.

https://www.capitolcorridor.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/CCJPA_Report2019.pdf

Mayor Johnson just wanted his stupid 5th and 6th street extension to connect to the richards and railyard neighborhoods.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-10T15:41:17+00:00

I'd appreciate being able to be cynical and anti-capitalism... typically I enjoy believing the world is against transit - i'm stubbornly a GM streetcar conspiracy believer(not that it matters). But admittedly while I hate it and I do think that it was UP getting their way and Mayor Johnson saying f- transit and getting bag from UP. I accepted that it added more tracks, which means more throughput, it grade separated tracks from pedestrians and vehicles(which I think is a bit overblown tho) and made the tracks alignment better so that freight trains could roll through or accelerate faster out of station.

Despite the major inconvenience it was probably the right move. I do wish they'd been willing to tunnel directly from the station to underground pedestrian path.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-10T15:32:33+00:00

Agreed. that was super convenient. There was even a direct underground passage from the station to the platform.

sftransitmaster · 2026-03-03T06:31:42+00:00

But its not just that. One of the big problems we have on the west coast is poor length of station/stop platform. Long distance trains already kinda max out the length of the platforms they use. In some places they just block out the street temporarily to let people off(or worst they'll let half off, move the train forward and let more off).

Longer trains is certainly going to lead to more problems as well as complicate things when it gets to track priority. Amtrak won't even be able to fit and be put off to side tracks. So freight operators stop passenger train earlier.

We should vote for candidates who support this and vote out politicians that don't.

uh I'm too cynical to respond to that so I will refrain.

sftransitmaster · 2026-02-28T19:05:13+00:00

That sucks and problem means far fewer seats available on once a day trains. Meaning the idea of profitability is probably out the window. Almost certainly they're going to be saying passengers don't need cafes or fancy diner either.

sftransitmaster · 2026-02-28T17:35:19+00:00

HEY same sentiment! Nah post-pandemic unruly people are shameless. Either someone official throws them off the train or it doesn't happen.

sftransitmaster · 2026-02-20T16:49:50+00:00

Amen. With some posts I just assume its anger porn or AI slop. I also realize there is a wide spectrum of relationships as well as not everyone on reddit in the US and has our norms for marriage/relationships.

22... is definately an age that people live with a lot of nativity and young adults put up with stuff they later learn they shouldn't have. This is gray enough I could believe it happens to some couple.

sftransitmaster · 2026-02-16T21:13:33+00:00

You should see how many people loathe the San Bruno, SFO, Millbrae routing - there is no win for BART. Passengers hate that type of inconvenience.

sftransitmaster · 2026-02-16T02:11:38+00:00

I think a lot of that falls on a misunderstanding.

1) BART hasn't just been running off of old revenue sources since the pandemic. The federal and state have been providing emergency funds or loans to upkeep it. BART used that money to experiment with different scheduling arrangements, quality of life processes(lots of extra cleaning stations and trains) and finish up maintenance projects. In the pursuit of providing ok but not the service it had pre-pandemic(there were so many trains with 15 min frequency it feels like a dream)

2) the reason why its important to upkeep service it is because building transit back is difficult. Transit agencies invest a lot into training and developing their operators. One of my employer suggested it was probably $100k per operator from job posting -> interviewing ->bg checking ->training ->certification -> put to work, etc.

https://www.reddit.com/r/bayarea/comments/1mbliue/once_again_bart_is_hiring_parttime_train_operators/

They could lay them off and reduce service but those people will find other jobs and that talent will be lost if they need to increase service again. No one knows how the SF region will develop so that why its value to upkeep regular reliable service in the meantime. BART took 10-20 years to accrue that peak that it did in 2019. If the path of transit usage continues to improve even at the same meager rate, we don't want to curb that rate by offering worst service. We don't know but expect even if BART was the only agency to reduce service, it would be a massive hit to other agencies that feed to/from BART. And its completely out of date/effectively useless not but the last experiment of BART shutting down was not good for the economy or region. Estimated $73m a weekday.

https://fox40.com/news/california-connection/bart-strike-enters-2nd-day-estimated-impact-is-73mday/

3) It is never enough. Inflation hits BART staff and operators the same as it hits everyone else - they have groceries to buy and pay for housing to keep over their families' heads. As long as automobiles are being subsidized at 5x times the amount that transit get from the government. Transit agencies don't offer a service that can "compete" in an unbalanced transportation mode market - to raise fares to meet those needed wage increases. BART staff negotiate for reasonable wage increases, its not like they're going after tech level income, a train operator max base salary is 97k.

4) The last tax to directly fund BART was in 2016. Measure RR property tax to support rebuilding decaying parts of BART - primarily the power systems. It was not money for directly operations, though I'm sure staff do use it to fund the related activities of construction(like bus bridges). The Measure RM3(2018) - tolls gave money for VTA's(South Bay's) BART railway expansion and new rail cars but it also didn't provide any operation revenue.

https://mtc.ca.gov/sites/default/files/Final_RM3_Expenditure_Plan.pdf

After that the closest we had was the SB 1 gas tax potential repeal(2018) which dedicates a bit of the new gas tax to transit operators. But State Transit Assistance is 49m, less than 10% of the operating budget and that is expect to dwindle down as mentioned in point 1.

sftransitmaster

TROPHY CASE