Perhaps the city and property owners might object to this shadow and noise further impinging on the ambiance of the area. If the OAC perhaps put it underground, these would not be issues… The environmental impact and taking of city land for project that the city might not endorse is certainly high-handed behavior. And a lack of support by the city might cause the Port to rethink applying its airport seat charge to this project.

MTC’s questionable behavior is highlighted in today’s article:

http://www.examiner.com/x-11025-Bay-Area-Public-Transportation-Examiner~y2009m10d1-MTC-fiddles-while-transit-burns

Just like Willie Brown and the BART extension to SFO, when it would have cost 1/10th as much to upgrade CalTrain and connect it to Montgomery (which of course is now being proposed)? I’m sure Willie’s tailor is paid in lots of small bills.

The only difference between here and Chicago is that in Chicago, 1) the bribes are cheaper (zoning change? $5,000, thank you very much) and 2) when you bribe someone, that thing gets done, whereas here you have a much bigger chance of it not happening (but the pol still takes the money, i.e. Don Perata).

As for the other political comments, I find it hilarious that in an area where there has been no elected Republican officials for, what, 40 years, residents still blame them for all their ills, or claim that they have the political monopoly on “lying.” (for a hoot, check out ACORN’s voter registration lists). Grow up and repeat, “the personal is NOT the political” and get that antiquated 60′s crud out of your system.

Yes, many politicians and bureaucrats are idiots, fools, and gullible. But when hundreds of millions of dollars get thrown about, you can be 100% sure that those politicians are getting their beaks wet.

It was a tough race, and our democratic system was well-served – unlike other places hereabouts where the candidates are too often merely the lesser of six or seven evils. Overall, it seems like fault enough can be ascribed to just about anyone zany enough to stand for office these days (followers of this blog excepted, of course), so we in District 3 came out okay in the wash this time, particularly when compared to how it used to be back in the days before Redding when the Council was a complete mess and downtown damn near dead and buried.

As Nancy is opposed to OAC, Rebecca’s analysis of the situation is pertinent: two or three more votes translates into a real problem for the hard line apologists at MTC, BART, CTC, etc. With enough of a yowl, maybe Arnold will step in as he did on the BB span and demand another bid. Who knows? Meanwhile, if Jean, Desley and Pat are open enough to see the awful downside of the connector (where’s the two stops in between that we were promised?),
maybe there’s five votes against.

Incidentally, the Mayor’s Task Forces recommended that a Transportation Commission be established just so that vital community input could counterbalance exactly this kind of sleazeball situation where policy descends from on high, representative of no one but special interests. In the meantime our At Large Councelmember (who, as above, served on the Transportation Task Force) has contemplated starting a Transportation Roundtable, sorta like the one that Supervisor Nate Miley began years ago when he ably served as District 6 Councilmember.

It’s a great idea, and I hope she’ll convene it soon: I’m ready to draw diagrams, write screeds and/or get involved as someone who believes that Oakland’s voice in transportation matters, especially considering our ultra-strategic position at the very epicenter of the greater Bay Area metropolitan region, is absolutely paramount.

Do you think anyone else might be willing to participate?

????

– S

RE: the BRT proposal – it is truly amazing what a polished and professional proposal was put forth in such a little amount of time. If done correctly, BRT could not only transform Hegenberger, but would potentially give ACTransit something to point to when it argues with shopkeepers on Telegraph.

i assume the cc members see no reason to waste their banked favor credits with regional transit powers that be and construction unions over an issue that most oakland voters either don’t know about, dont care about, or will forget about before next election.

-len

As for incumbents losing elections, I believe Nancy Nadel was the last person to unseat a full term incumbent, but I may be wrong.

That’s not the point. The point is that incumbent BART Board and County Supes don’t even have to work to keep their seats. Last election, De La Fuente and Nadel had to run serious, expensive campaigns, and Nadel came within under 200 votes of a runoff.

BART Board and the Supes have nothing like that kind of race to deal with. They’re relatively unknown names in relatively low-profile seats. They can fairly easily ignore the public voice. (Although with the Oscar Grant fiasco and losing the support of virtually every pro-transit advocacy group, BART Board might actually have some fights on their hands in 2010.)