As I begin to ask the candidates running for city council and mayor, I realized it was time for a change from my old blog Bicycle San Antonio
to the new aatblog. The ‘a’ ‘a’ ‘t’ stand for Alamo Alternative
Transportation, and when I was looking for a domain name, aatblog.com
was available. The reason for the change is simple, I don’t want any
future blog post to be confused with the advocacy group Bike San Antonio especially the upcoming San Antonio Bicycle Voter’s Guide 2019 that I’m busy working on for the City’s May 4th election.
I’m not going to be deleting anything from Bicycle San Antonio
at all and will continue to site back to it from time to time. My
fear, unfounded or not, was that someone would try to sue the advocacy
group, thinking that the voters guide came from them instead of me. For
the record, I’m a private citizen simply trying to inform my fellow
citizens on the bicycling, transit issues and new urbanism. Bike San Antonio is a 501c3 and due to that tax status, they can’t say anything about politics.
For now you can still reach me on my twitter handle @BikeSanAntonio, Instagram a thttps://www.instagram.com/bicyclesanantonio/ and Facebook at https://www.facebook.com/bikesanantonio/. It’s going to be awhile before I’m able to change all my Social Media pages to the aatblog. So please bear with me.
Sunday, March 3, 2019
Monday, February 18, 2019
#ivotebike2017, the VIA Questions.
It's that time again, another Municipal Election is coming up in May. It is now time to see if my questions from 2017 had any effect. In this posting, I'll be focusing on the three questions that I asked about the candidate position on VIA and how they influence the last two years.
The previous question that I asked.....
I. Are you willing to look for more funding options to improve and expand VIA bus service?
Thanks to the the efforts of Rey Saldaña, VIA got more funding from the city general funds for the fiscal year of 2018, and due to his efforts, by May 2018, VIA saw an increase in ridership on the routes that they improved frequency with more plans to increase frequency on several more routes. The problem coming up is that Saldaña is being term limited out of office thus threatening continued funding of VIA from the city general funds. So in the upcoming election, I will be asking That as council member, will you continue to fund VIA with general funds to maintain VIA's level of service.
J. Will you support free bus rides for all residents of SA?
 |
| 82.1 |
J. Will you support free bus rides for all residents of SA?
This was my own personal question that I asked and laid out my case for it in a previous blog post "The Case for Free Bus Rides." Since May 2017, we saw VIA offer free rides on Sept 5, 2017 due to the gasoline shortages only to have some people complain, "you don't go where I need to go." There was even talk about "Fare Free Zones" at some of it's busiest stops, but that talk has gone away. I cannot tell that if VIA's current UPass was a result of asking this question, but it definitely a move in the right direction. UPass is a service to provide free rides for OLLU students and to all Alamo Community College students and faculity.
Since the time of the election, a new idea has come along called "Fare Capping." Already DART in Dallas has started using this method to make the buses more equitable and there's talk from Indianapolis about joining the ranks of DART and TriMet in Portland, Oregon using this method. In San Antonio, a VIA board member Ezra A Johnson said in a tweet (Image 82.1) that he'll be working on getting Fare Capping working here in San Antonio as soon as the technology becomes available to VIA.
If you want to know what "Fare Capping is, I recommend that you watch the video below which is the best video out there explaining what it is.
The Fare Capping Chronicles from TransitCenter on Vimeo.
K. Are you willing to bring Light Rail to a vote?
I added this question because a lot of people who read this blog want some type of passenger rail service in San Antonio if not a Tramway, then a Commuter Rail that is currently operational in the DFW and Austin area. But with the Mayor's reversal on this decision about rail and silly talk about the "Politically Correct Streetcar," he clearly went back on his word. And because I know so much about transportation, I'm split. On the one hand, I understand that having a rail line especially out to the AT&T Center will get spur fans out of their cars. But tramway systems built after the 1980's in the USA don't go where the people want go because they're usually placed on old abandon railroad right-of-ways where much of the abandoned industry was located. The train stations that are build are built with acres of parking lots surrounding the train station and not in locations connected to where people want to go. This recent story from Streetsblog Denver explains why even though Denver has a tramway system in place, the transit system as a whole isn't really useful. The same thing goes for Dallas. My fear that if we go with rail, then we'll end up like those other cities.
Since the time of the election, a new idea has come along called "Fare Capping." Already DART in Dallas has started using this method to make the buses more equitable and there's talk from Indianapolis about joining the ranks of DART and TriMet in Portland, Oregon using this method. In San Antonio, a VIA board member Ezra A Johnson said in a tweet (Image 82.1) that he'll be working on getting Fare Capping working here in San Antonio as soon as the technology becomes available to VIA.
If you want to know what "Fare Capping is, I recommend that you watch the video below which is the best video out there explaining what it is.
The Fare Capping Chronicles from TransitCenter on Vimeo.
K. Are you willing to bring Light Rail to a vote?
I added this question because a lot of people who read this blog want some type of passenger rail service in San Antonio if not a Tramway, then a Commuter Rail that is currently operational in the DFW and Austin area. But with the Mayor's reversal on this decision about rail and silly talk about the "Politically Correct Streetcar," he clearly went back on his word. And because I know so much about transportation, I'm split. On the one hand, I understand that having a rail line especially out to the AT&T Center will get spur fans out of their cars. But tramway systems built after the 1980's in the USA don't go where the people want go because they're usually placed on old abandon railroad right-of-ways where much of the abandoned industry was located. The train stations that are build are built with acres of parking lots surrounding the train station and not in locations connected to where people want to go. This recent story from Streetsblog Denver explains why even though Denver has a tramway system in place, the transit system as a whole isn't really useful. The same thing goes for Dallas. My fear that if we go with rail, then we'll end up like those other cities.
In some ways, not going after rail does force San Antonio to focus on solutions that includes bicycles, making buses work fast and efficiently, pouring resources into VIA bus routes that stand to gain the most ridership, and working on land use policies that will that will promote not needing to own a person vehicle. I am going to make the argument that if we had a tramway built in San Antonio, VIA would have never focus on the current Primo bus expansions that are taking place on Zarzamora and in the future, Military Dr. (Image 82.2)
 |
| 82.2 |
I can only hope that the leaders of this new nonprofit called ConnectSA have the vision to see past an automobile for people who are over the age of 60 are the main ones always complaining about the lack of available free parking and bike lanes making their driving miserable as if the lack of exercise isn't the real culprit. I suggest that you get signed up to ConnectSA on information about meetings and events and to show your disgust when they come up with the same non solutions we have seen forever of not removing parking minimums, adding no HOV lanes, ignoring protected bikeways and avoiding bus only lanes.
So it's now time to take a survey to see whether or not you think that the city council and mayor are even bicycle or transit friendly. To Access the survey, please click here.
My Plans for the Future of this Blog.
Since this blog shares a similar name to the Advocacy Group "Bike San Antonio," I'm going to be changing it to Alamo Alternative Transportation in March and will be doing any election recommendations for the 2019 election through that new blog. I'll post a link in this blog right before I write the last post.
Also the questions that I will be asking the candidates about VIA will be....
- Do you support "Fare Capping"?
- Will you either maintain or increase the funding for VIA from the city of San Antonio general revenue?
- Do you understand what the "Trackless Train" is?
If you have any other questions that you want to ask the candidates, either take my survey on #ivotebike2017 which ends on March 1st, 2019 at 12:01am or leave them in the comments below.
URL to Survey: https://goo.gl/forms/aXNpGIILN96hwcHl2
Images:
82.1: A Screenshot of Ezra's Tweet. https://twitter.com/Ezra4SA/status/1088200720615202816
82.2: A Screenshot of the New Primo Bus Schedules. https://www.viainfo.net/primo_service/Friday, December 14, 2018
VIA is blocking Bike Facilities
Working 12 to 14 hour a day don't help when I need to write this blog post so I do miss a lot of things that I should be writing about, but I cannot pass this up. It has come to my attention that the city of San Antonio isn't interested in providing the protected bikeway south of Josephine that virtually all people who ride a bicycle in San Antonio wants. From the grapevine, I hearing that VIA is standing in the way of a Protected Bikeway because they would like to see future rapid transit go down Broadway. I am also going to tie in a public announcement going around asking you to stop at red lights.
Here's the dilemma. Do we as a city want cars to go fast, or are we serious about Vision Zero? For if we want motor vehicles to go fast, well we really should rethink the entire project and turn Broadway and N Alamo into one way stroads. To make these one way stroads into compliance with Vision Zero, then we are going to need a protected bikeway both down N Alamo and Broadway due to the fast moving motor vehicles.
I discovered that this public announcement on the Chain Reaction San Antonio Facebook Page and other friends timelines asking cyclist to stop at red lights so they don't hate us so much. I'm here to inform you stopping at all the red lights while riding your bicycle will not make motorist stop hating you.
There's a reason why people who ride are happy and that's simply because when you exercise, your body produces endorphins. When you are in operation of a motor vehicle, you are more likely to get angry because you are sitting down, not moving and stuck inside a cage, literally. Having to stop your car constantly creates stress so when you happen to see someone run the red light on two wheels, well you're pissed off. It's not just having to stop and go, stop and go and not hit the idiot in front of you, but you're worried about your finances because you barely make ends meat, you don't have money to pay for the deferred maintenance on the car your driving let alone gas and you need a car to get by. And now, a fucking cyclist who can't keep up with your car is slowing you down. Unless that driver is aware of the law, he or she will be thinking that damn cyclist should be on that non existing sidewalk that the driver cannot see because they're sitting so low to the ground. Let's not forget that angry driver will be unaware of the law, City of San Antonio (Code 1959, § 38-52)
Sec. 19-286. - Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited.
(a) It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or propel or park or stand any vehicle upon any sidewalk.
So I have a question to ask anyone, how is having people stopping at red lights and stop signs going to make that motorist happy? I run red lights all the time and I know that's it's against the law. But I found that in many cases, it's safer to run that red light then it is for the motorist violates the 3ft rule passing me as I ride through an intersection after the light has turned green. What makes motorist the most happy in my experience is when you're waiting at a red light, (yes I don't run them all) that you get out of their way and allow them to make that right turn. Another thing is when your in the left lane waiting for the light to turn green, is to go strait across the intersection and then go left By doing this you allow the car behind that were waiting behind you to speed away and pass you at the same time.
My rules for running a red light is located at the end of this blog post.
My rules for running a red light is located at the end of this blog post.
A thing that the city could do to encourage people on bicycles to stop at red lights is to build the necessary Protected Bikeways for they encourage people to stop at red lights and in my travels to other cities that I rode, I see people stopping at red lights more often when they're in a protected bikeway but not always in a bike lane. Now this brings me to Broadway for I have heard that VIA is now the biggest opposition to a protected bikeway. You've probably have seen my post on FB and Instagram asking people to email richard.grochowski@sanantonio.gov of the engineer in charge of the project. Well we need to contact VIA by clicking here. When on the page, click on "Submit Online Comments Here". In the first box, choose ". Let them know that you want them to put a Protected bicycle lane instead of Rapid Transit. Also sending tweets and posting on their Facebook page will also help.
If you want me to explain what a "Stroad" is, please watch this video.
Here's the dilemma. Do we as a city want cars to go fast, or are we serious about Vision Zero? For if we want motor vehicles to go fast, well we really should rethink the entire project and turn Broadway and N Alamo into one way stroads. To make these one way stroads into compliance with Vision Zero, then we are going to need a protected bikeway both down N Alamo and Broadway due to the fast moving motor vehicles.
Now if we want to encourage development along Broadway, we're going to have to slow down the motor vehicles including VIA's buses, reduce the travel lanes from 4 to 2. The decision has to be made on what the final goal for this project should look like. VIA should be advocating for one way stroads if they want faster buses along with protected bicycle lanes to keep the slow moving bicycles out of buses way.
Now if you remember the last city election in 2017 I had a voters guide and in that guide, I had a question that asked, Will you make sure Broadway has a protected bicycle lane from Houston to Hildebrand? Well I'll be holding the Mayor Nirenberg and Councilman Trevino to account for this if it's not in the final plans come march, then well, these two people will not be recommended by me or this blog. So please let the mayor, the councilman Trevino know when you email them.
To Contact the Mayor, please click here...
Facebook
Twitter
To Contact Trevino, Please click here....
Facebook
Twitter
Rules for Running a Red Light on your bicycle.
Always remember that it is illegal in 49 states to run a red light on your bicycle. The exception is the Idaho Law.
Always treat a red light as a stop sign and COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. Look left and look right. when the intersection is clear and you know you have time to make it safely acroos, proceed.
When approaching a red light with cars waiting DO NOT GO AROUND THE CARS. Wait behind the car until the light turns green and the car proceed.
When riding in bicycle lane and you're approaching a red light, look for the cars with their right blinkers on and wait behind them. Treat the person behind the wheel of the car with their right blinker as if they aren't paying attention. Stay behind the vehicle until they make their turn then proceed. Make eye contact with the person behind the car with the blinker and stare at them for a few seconds.
Always remember if you get hit by a car running a red light, it is your fault.
And those are the rules that I follow when I decide to run a red light.
To Contact the Mayor, please click here...
To Contact Trevino, Please click here....
Rules for Running a Red Light on your bicycle.
Always remember that it is illegal in 49 states to run a red light on your bicycle. The exception is the Idaho Law.
Always treat a red light as a stop sign and COME TO A COMPLETE STOP. Look left and look right. when the intersection is clear and you know you have time to make it safely acroos, proceed.
When approaching a red light with cars waiting DO NOT GO AROUND THE CARS. Wait behind the car until the light turns green and the car proceed.
When riding in bicycle lane and you're approaching a red light, look for the cars with their right blinkers on and wait behind them. Treat the person behind the wheel of the car with their right blinker as if they aren't paying attention. Stay behind the vehicle until they make their turn then proceed. Make eye contact with the person behind the car with the blinker and stare at them for a few seconds.
Always remember if you get hit by a car running a red light, it is your fault.
And those are the rules that I follow when I decide to run a red light.
Friday, November 16, 2018
N St Mary's, There will never be enough parking.
 |
| 80.1 |
 |
| 80.2 |
Lets start with the "parking problem," or in this case the result of having a great place. When you have a great place, people will show up and because everyone is forced to own a car to get around. Well the residence don't like parking on their streets. In our capitalist world, it is sacrilege to impose on our free parking regardless of the cost it imposes on everyone else. The only solution that was floated by the chief of Staff for Trevino's District one office was to offer a plan that is currently in place in Southtown. But here's my question, why can't we charge for on street parking and use those fees that are collected to improve and maintain the neighborhood? This is called a Parking Benifit District, where the fees of the parking are collected and go back into the neighborhood and you don't have to look far for there's one of these Parking Benifit District in Austin. But god forbid we do it here an actually put money back in the neighborhood that everyone is visiting because that's just common sense and we just can't have that in San Antonio. This is why there's a saying "Keep San Antonio Lame."
 |
| 80.3 |
When we look at TCI's plan, (80.3) we see everything that goes against good urbanism which are wide vehicle lanes, narrow sidewalks, and no protected bikeway. What TCI does float as a solution to not planing a protected bikeway is parking during the nighttime and a bike lane during the daytime which I know from experience, there will be cars parked in the bike lane and don't be surprise that there's a food truck in that lane during the day. The only thing that I can figure that the reason why we see this design with 12 foot lanes is because the need for our large fire and EMS vehicles to be able to get through fast. Yet these wide lanes only encourage speeding, the opposite of Vision ZERO. (Image 80.4)
Thanks to the courageous people who created a crosswalk last year on N St Mary's, TCI will be putting "Bulb-Outs" to many of the intersections along the strip. These "bulb-outs" which are better known as sneckdowns in other places are extensions of the sidewalk into the street to slow down turning cars. I posted a video called "Snowy Sneckdowns" by Streetfilms years ago on my Facebook page explaining how these "Bulb-outs" slow down turning cars. My biggest thing against this design is that TCI will not be cutting a 5ft way through the bulb-out, instead forcing cyclist towards the cars like they already do to the bulb outs on N Main next to the Fox Tech. (Image 80.5) Now TCI did build a bicycle cutout of a bulb out already a few years ago when they completed that useless protected bikeway on E Commerce underneath I-37, (Image 80.6) but having experience on how other projects turn out, I'm betting this project is going to live up to the saying "Keep San Antonio Lame."
 |
| 80.4 |
 |
| 80.5 |
Bike San Antonio, (no affiliation to my blog) has come out for a full protected bikeway (80.1) either a two-way protected Bikeway on one side of the strip with parking on the other side or having a protected bikeway on either side of the strip. And don't get me wrong, I'm way for this but I have a feeling that TCI along with the Councilman's Trevino's office and the Tobin Hill Neighborhood association will prevent this from happening. So when you email the councilman and the engineers designing this project, (see at the bottom for email addresses) please let them know that you don't want to be forced out into traffic when approaching a bulb-out, that you want to be able to go through that bulb-out instead of around it. Also having the bicycles go through those bulb-outs will force the cars to make slower turns, keeping with TCI's goal of Vision Zero.
 |
| 80.6 |
But I'm going to make a prediction, I'm going to be posting a tweet of the bulb-out with my bicycle parked in the bike lane once it is build out saying "Thanks @sanantoniotci for Keeping San Antonio Lame and being anti #VisionZero." Please Mr Trevino, prevent me from making this prediction a reality.
As with Bike San Antonio request, I ask everyone here to take time out to send emails to the following address to tell them to support having not just a protected bikeways down N St Mary's but if they don't do that, have cutouts into the "Bulb-outs" so people don't have to ride close to the speeding cars, Thanks.
sean.strong@sanantonio.gov, james.wucinski@sanantonio.gov, joe.doctor@sanantonio.gov, district1@sanantonio.gov
Read the Rivard Report story on this meeting. (Image 80.2)
Images:
80.1: Bike San Antonio Recommendations compare to TCI designed.
80.2: TCI meeting announcement for N St Mary's.
80.3: TCI's crossection showing their recommended Design at the Meeting.
80.4: A Meme created by StrongTowns.org Illustrating how wide Lanes for emergency vehicles cause the crashes they are designed to help save the victims from.
80.5: An "bulb-out" N Main Ave with the bike lane between the cars and the "bulb-out."
80.6: The "bulb-out" at the South Bound Exit ramp to E Commerce which has a cut out for cyclist to get onto the Protected Bikeway.
As with Bike San Antonio request, I ask everyone here to take time out to send emails to the following address to tell them to support having not just a protected bikeways down N St Mary's but if they don't do that, have cutouts into the "Bulb-outs" so people don't have to ride close to the speeding cars, Thanks.
sean.strong@sanantonio.gov, james.wucinski@sanantonio.gov, joe.doctor@sanantonio.gov, district1@sanantonio.gov
Read the Rivard Report story on this meeting. (Image 80.2)
Images:
80.1: Bike San Antonio Recommendations compare to TCI designed.
80.2: TCI meeting announcement for N St Mary's.
80.3: TCI's crossection showing their recommended Design at the Meeting.
80.4: A Meme created by StrongTowns.org Illustrating how wide Lanes for emergency vehicles cause the crashes they are designed to help save the victims from.
80.5: An "bulb-out" N Main Ave with the bike lane between the cars and the "bulb-out."
80.6: The "bulb-out" at the South Bound Exit ramp to E Commerce which has a cut out for cyclist to get onto the Protected Bikeway.
Tuesday, October 23, 2018
Why Cyclist Should Vote NO.
When
I started writing this blog post about Prop A, B and C, I thought that I
would tie it into what Chuck Marohn (presentation starts at 17:24) and Joe Minicozzi talk about on why
our cities across America are dying. But the more
I wrote, and read into these propositions, the more I began
to realize that this is an attempt by outside forces that don't have
biking in mind for the future of transportation let alone transit to gain a foot hold in shaping city policy.
Unless you are big readers of Streetsblog USA, you probably haven't heard about the stories on how the Koch Brothers PAC, Americans For Prosperity, campaigned in several cities to stop transit initiatives especially those that required a sales tax hike. In the New York Times story, "How the Koch Brothers Are Killing Public Transit Projects Around the Country" the author quotes from Tori Venable, the Tennessee state director of Americans for Prosperity saying: “If someone has the freedom to go where they want, do what they want, they’re not going to choose public transit.” This is clearly not the case for if you compare the amount of return on investment to highways compared to transit, transit gets a better return so Venable's Statement "they're not going to choose public transit" is false. Just look at Tony Dutzik (Assoc. Director and Sr. Policy Analyst at the Frontier Group) tweet on his comparison on the the amount of money spent on transit compared to highways. Apparently highways got way more money and less return on investment compared to transit when taking into account for the increase in the number of users.
Now the Koch Brothers don't need to have their Americans for Prosperity PAC to do their political campaigning because there's already a like minded organization here called Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF) and Texans for Toll-Free Highways which are full of people who think just like Tori Venable. Many of the articles listed on TURF are from the CATO Institute's Randal O'Toole, a famous anti transit advocate. In one of the stories that TURF has posted, they have a quote in the story saying "San Antonio is using an “advanced transportation” tax to pave costly sidewalks and bike paths." Again, go back to Charles Marohn video and learn how investing in sidewalks and bicycle lanes actually leads to increase tax revenues.
Proposition A states:
Remember, for the last 10 years, we pretty much said yes to a sales tax increase to fund certain initiatives. Now take into account what's going on right now as I write this is that the city is working on changing it's zoning ordinances to allow more density and there's talk about mayor Nirenberg bringing a referendum to the voters to give VIA more funding and you begin to realize that Prop A is written to repeal everything the city is currently doing.
Proposition B States:
In a few more months, we'll eventually find the person who paid for the collection of the signatures and I'm betting that person will hold similar views of the Koch Brothers. And why support a union when your anti union? Well the answer to that is the Police, Fire, and EMT employees hold a certain amount of respect in our society and their unions can hold power over the the local government of the employees they represent. In essence, the people who paid for the collection of the signatures wants the Fire Union Boss to become the most powerful person behind the political scenes in San Antonio. And it's not me coming to this conclusion for Rick Casey wrote an opinion piece in the Rivard Report titled: "Fire Union Boss Steele Seeks to Gain Power by Targeting It." In his opinion piece he realizes that if all three propositions pass, they will make Chris Steele the most powerful man in the city limits of San Antonio.
When you look at all the propositions from C to A, and the amount of money that was paid for to collect the signatures to put these props on the ballot, you begin to realize what it is all about. In Prop C, it ain't about the Fire Union getting the necessary compensation for doing their job, but to make the person in charge of the Fire Union to be the unelected leader in charge of San Antonio and to hold the city hostage. Prop B is written to make sure that the next city manager is chosen at the whim of the Firefighters Union President and if the person who gets appointed ain't his choice, well they just have to wait 8 years to get who they want to be in that position. And finally, Prop A is designed to make it harder for real change to take hold in San Antonio and make the Firefighters Union the go to organization to collect the signatures necessary to to repeal not just ordinances, but sales taxes, zoning changes and setting utility rates.
The insidious thing about all these propositions is that redundancy was written into each one. So if one or two of them don't pass, you have one left to pull the strings with. So if Prop A passes, then you can find TURF or anyone with money to throw around to overturn everything the Koch Brothers don't like in every election. If just Prop B passes, you cripple the city in the pocket book allowing the State of Texas to perhaps, appoint an emergency manager like the ones that took over bankrupt towns and cities in Michigan. If just Prop C Passes, you have a corrupt union leader to cripple the city by demanding everything under the sun including large, diesel guzzling vehicles in the name of safety and wide streets to race to the scene of the emergency that those wide streets created all the while lying from their teeth that bicycle lanes make things dangerous.
So I hope that everyone who wants to see a bicycle friendlier city votes no on Prop A, B and C. The wording for each prop was copy and pasted from the official Bexar County Generic Sample Ballot by clicking here: https://www.bexar.org/DocumentCenter/View/4570/Generic-Sample-Ballot-PDF?bidId=.
If you need the locations of early voting sites, please click here: https://www.bexar.org/DocumentCenter/View/4572/Early-Voting-Locations-and-Hours-of-Operation-PDF?bidId=.
Also, some of the people that I know won't be showing up to vote because their party didn't get on the ballot. My advice to them, is go vote and just leave those who you think that aren't deserving of the position blank and vote NO for Prop A, B and C.
JOINT GENERAL, SPECIAL, CHARTER AND BOND ELECTION
Unless you are big readers of Streetsblog USA, you probably haven't heard about the stories on how the Koch Brothers PAC, Americans For Prosperity, campaigned in several cities to stop transit initiatives especially those that required a sales tax hike. In the New York Times story, "How the Koch Brothers Are Killing Public Transit Projects Around the Country" the author quotes from Tori Venable, the Tennessee state director of Americans for Prosperity saying: “If someone has the freedom to go where they want, do what they want, they’re not going to choose public transit.” This is clearly not the case for if you compare the amount of return on investment to highways compared to transit, transit gets a better return so Venable's Statement "they're not going to choose public transit" is false. Just look at Tony Dutzik (Assoc. Director and Sr. Policy Analyst at the Frontier Group) tweet on his comparison on the the amount of money spent on transit compared to highways. Apparently highways got way more money and less return on investment compared to transit when taking into account for the increase in the number of users.
Now the Koch Brothers don't need to have their Americans for Prosperity PAC to do their political campaigning because there's already a like minded organization here called Texans Uniting for Reform and Freedom (TURF) and Texans for Toll-Free Highways which are full of people who think just like Tori Venable. Many of the articles listed on TURF are from the CATO Institute's Randal O'Toole, a famous anti transit advocate. In one of the stories that TURF has posted, they have a quote in the story saying "San Antonio is using an “advanced transportation” tax to pave costly sidewalks and bike paths." Again, go back to Charles Marohn video and learn how investing in sidewalks and bicycle lanes actually leads to increase tax revenues.
"The Cato Institute is a libertarian think tank founded by Charles G. Koch and funded by the Koch brothers. It is headquartered in Washington, D.C. The Institute states that it favors policies "that are consistent with the traditional American principles of limited government, individual liberty, and peace." Jan 26, 2018 Cato Institute - Source Watch: https://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php/Cato_Institute.As you read these propositions, take into account how voters here have never said no to such increases lately whether it was about finding money for the Howard W. Peak Greenways, getting PK4 SA funded or to buy land over the Edwards Aquifer Recharge Zone. So lets go into the Propositions that are place on the ballot and see what they say.
Proposition A states:
SHALL THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO EXPAND THE TYPES OF ORDINANCES THAT MAY BE SUBJECT TO REFERENDUM INCLUDING APPROPRIATION OF MONEY, LEVYING A TAX, GRANTING A FRANCHISE, FIXING PUBLIC UTILITY RATES, ZONING AND REZONING OF PROPERTY; INCREASE THE NUMBER OF DAYS WITHIN WHICH A PETITION MAY BE FILED SEEKING A REFERENDUM ON AN ORDINANCE PASSED BY COUNCIL FROM FORTY TO ONE HUNDRED EIGHTY DAYS AFTER PASSAGE OF THE ORDINANCE; AND TO PROVIDE THAT NO MORE THAN TWENTY THOUSAND SIGNATURES OF REGISTERED VOTERS ARE REQUIRED FOR A REFERENDUM PETITION IN STEAD OF TEN PERCENT OF THOSE ELECTORS QUALIFIED TO VOTE AT THE LAST REGULAR MUNICIPAL ELECTION?It basically says, "if I don't like what you're doing and what ordinances been passed, then I'm going to get signatures to change it my way and I'm given 6 months to find the people who hate what you did instead of 40 days." This will change the city charter to make it easier to reverse ordinances, sales tax hikes or what District Councilman Rey Saldana did to appropriate more money to VIA and that doesn't go into all the other things like the opposition to the LGBQ Nondiscrimination Ordinance.
Remember, for the last 10 years, we pretty much said yes to a sales tax increase to fund certain initiatives. Now take into account what's going on right now as I write this is that the city is working on changing it's zoning ordinances to allow more density and there's talk about mayor Nirenberg bringing a referendum to the voters to give VIA more funding and you begin to realize that Prop A is written to repeal everything the city is currently doing.
Proposition B States:
SHALL THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO LIMIT THE TERM THE CITY MANAGER MAY SERVE TO NO LONGER THAN EIGHT YEARS AND TO LIMIT THE COMPENSATION OF THE CITY MANAGER TO NO MORE THAN TEN TIMES THE ANNUAL SALARY FURNISHED TO THE LOWEST PAID FULL-TIME CITY EMPLOYEE AND REQUIRE A SUPER MAJORITY VOTE OF CITY COUNCIL TO APPOINT THE CITY MANAGER?Now for the record, I don't like Sheryl Sculley and wishes that she be fired. But at the same time, I won't be saying that she doesn't deserve her pay for the triple AAA credit rating makes that argument moot. I agree with What Jarrett Walker, author of the blog Human Transit said in his blog post 'basics: should I vote for a transit tax?' In question "6. But the managers have such big salaries!," his response is spot on, quote:
"You’d better hope they do. These are complex jobs with appalling responsibilities. Many of the people in them could go to the private sector and make ten times as much. The best of them are in this business because they believe in it."Prop B isn't written to reign in the current city manager position, but to make sure that there isn't a person to replace Sculley. Now I don't believe that Sculley is in the position for "pious" reasons, but I do know that after the job she has done, she does deserve her current pay. If you ever took time to watch Chuck Marohn (presentation starts at 17:24) and Joe Minicozzi talk, you begin to see that her decisions are made from the standpoint of trying to make sure that everyone gets trash pick up.
Now
this Prop B won't be reducing Sculley's pay or reducing the amount of
time she has left to serve. This proposition, if passed will affect
the next city
manager that will replace Sculley and as much as I agree with the ideal
of reducing the compensation of the city manager, I don't agree with term limiting the next person who takes over for Sculley for that person will need more than 8 years to clean up her mess and I consider term limits a lazy way to replace the political opposition.
When you take into account the way Prop B is written, you begin to realize that it's written to make it impossible to elect a new city manager for it will require a super majority approval. The way it was written is to allow only someone at the top of the political power pyramid in San Antonio to decide who becomes the city manager and it's so happens that there's another proposition on the ballot called Prop C to create this exact position.
When you take into account the way Prop B is written, you begin to realize that it's written to make it impossible to elect a new city manager for it will require a super majority approval. The way it was written is to allow only someone at the top of the political power pyramid in San Antonio to decide who becomes the city manager and it's so happens that there's another proposition on the ballot called Prop C to create this exact position.
Proposition C states:
SHALL THE CITY CHARTER BE AMENDED TO PROVIDE THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS LOCAL 624 WITH UNILATERAL AUTHORITY TO REQUIRE THE CITY TO PARTICIPATE IN BINDING ARBITRATION OF ALL ISSUES IN DISPUTE WITH THE ASSOCIATION WITHIN FORTY-FIVE DAYS OF THE CITY'S RECEIPT OF THE ASSOCIATION'S WRITTEN ARBITRATION REQUEST?If Prop C passes, it will give the fire union the sole right to declare when it has reached an impasse with the city on contract negotiations and unilaterally require that San Antonio go to binding arbitration. The people that I've seen align with the Firefighters Union on this Proposition are normally against unions especially with unions getting this much power. So I have to ask the question, why are people who are normally against unions backing this measure to give Local 624 lot of power?
In a few more months, we'll eventually find the person who paid for the collection of the signatures and I'm betting that person will hold similar views of the Koch Brothers. And why support a union when your anti union? Well the answer to that is the Police, Fire, and EMT employees hold a certain amount of respect in our society and their unions can hold power over the the local government of the employees they represent. In essence, the people who paid for the collection of the signatures wants the Fire Union Boss to become the most powerful person behind the political scenes in San Antonio. And it's not me coming to this conclusion for Rick Casey wrote an opinion piece in the Rivard Report titled: "Fire Union Boss Steele Seeks to Gain Power by Targeting It." In his opinion piece he realizes that if all three propositions pass, they will make Chris Steele the most powerful man in the city limits of San Antonio.
When you look at all the propositions from C to A, and the amount of money that was paid for to collect the signatures to put these props on the ballot, you begin to realize what it is all about. In Prop C, it ain't about the Fire Union getting the necessary compensation for doing their job, but to make the person in charge of the Fire Union to be the unelected leader in charge of San Antonio and to hold the city hostage. Prop B is written to make sure that the next city manager is chosen at the whim of the Firefighters Union President and if the person who gets appointed ain't his choice, well they just have to wait 8 years to get who they want to be in that position. And finally, Prop A is designed to make it harder for real change to take hold in San Antonio and make the Firefighters Union the go to organization to collect the signatures necessary to to repeal not just ordinances, but sales taxes, zoning changes and setting utility rates.
The insidious thing about all these propositions is that redundancy was written into each one. So if one or two of them don't pass, you have one left to pull the strings with. So if Prop A passes, then you can find TURF or anyone with money to throw around to overturn everything the Koch Brothers don't like in every election. If just Prop B passes, you cripple the city in the pocket book allowing the State of Texas to perhaps, appoint an emergency manager like the ones that took over bankrupt towns and cities in Michigan. If just Prop C Passes, you have a corrupt union leader to cripple the city by demanding everything under the sun including large, diesel guzzling vehicles in the name of safety and wide streets to race to the scene of the emergency that those wide streets created all the while lying from their teeth that bicycle lanes make things dangerous.
So I hope that everyone who wants to see a bicycle friendlier city votes no on Prop A, B and C. The wording for each prop was copy and pasted from the official Bexar County Generic Sample Ballot by clicking here: https://www.bexar.org/DocumentCenter/View/4570/Generic-Sample-Ballot-PDF?bidId=.
If you need the locations of early voting sites, please click here: https://www.bexar.org/DocumentCenter/View/4572/Early-Voting-Locations-and-Hours-of-Operation-PDF?bidId=.
Also, some of the people that I know won't be showing up to vote because their party didn't get on the ballot. My advice to them, is go vote and just leave those who you think that aren't deserving of the position blank and vote NO for Prop A, B and C.
JOINT GENERAL, SPECIAL, CHARTER AND BOND ELECTION
THE HOURS OF EARLY VOTING WILL BE:
Mon, Oct. 22 thru Fri, Oct. 26...............................................................8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
Sat, Oct. 27, 2018...................................................................................8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Sun, Oct. 28, 2018................................................................................12:00pm to 6:00 p.m.
Mon, Oct. 29 thru Fri, Nov. 2..............................................................8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.
Main Early Voting Location:
BEXAR COUNTY ELECTION DEPARTMENT...................................1103 S. Frio
****DEAFLINK available for the hearing impaired.
BEXAR COUNTY JUSTICE CENTER...................................................................300 Dolorosa
BROOKHOLLOW LIBRARY...............................................................530 Heimer Road
CASTLE HILLS CITY HALL...(COMMUNITY ROOM)................................209 Lemonwood Dr.
CLAUDE BLACK CENTER......................................................................2805 East Commerce
CODY LIBRARY......................................................................................11441 Vance Jackson
CONVERSE CITY HALL...................................................................... 405S. Seguin Rd
COPERNICUS COMMUNITY CENTER.....................................................5003 Lord Rd.
EAST CENTRAL ISD ADMIN BUILDING..............................6634 New Sulphur Springs Road
ENCINO PARK LIBRARY...........................................................2515 East Evans Rd
FAIR OAKS RANCH CITY HALL... (COUNCIL CHAMBERS)..................7286 Dietz Elkhorn
GREAT NORTHWEST LIBRARY..............................................................9050 Wellwood
HENRY A. GUERRA, JR.LIBRARY.......................................................7978 W Military Drive
JOHN IGO LIBRARY.................................................................. 13330 Kyle Seale Parkway
JOHNSTON LIBRARY............................................................................6307 Sun Valley Drive
JULIA YATES SEMMES LIBRARY @ Comanche Lookout Park.............15060 Judson Road
LAS PALMAS LIBRARY...........................................................................515 Castroville Road
LEON VALLEY CONFERENCE CENTER...................................................6421 Evers Rd
LION’S FIELD.....................................................................................................2809 Broadway
MAURY MAVERICK, JR. LIBRARY................................................................8700 Mystic Park
MCCRELESS LIBRARY...................................................................1023 Ada Street
MEMORIAL LIBRARY.............................................................................. 3222 Culebra
MISSION LIBRARY......................................................................3134Roosevelt Ave.
NORTHSIDE ACTIVITY CENTER.................................................................7001 Culebra
NORTHWEST VISTA COLLEGE........................................................ 3535 N. Ellison Dr.
OLMOS CITY HALL...............................................................................120 El Prado W
PALO ALTO COLLEGE................................................................ 1400 W. Villaret Blvd.
PARMAN LIBRARY@Stone Oak.................................................. 20735 Wilderness Oak
PRECINCT 1 SATELLITE OFFICE................................................... 3505 Pleasanton Rd.
SAN ANTONIO COMMUNITY COLLEGE (ECO Centro Bldg)...................... 1802 N. Main
SCHAEFER LIBRARY.......................................................................6322 US Hwy 87 E
SHAVANO PARK CITY HALL... (COUNCIL CHAMB).......................... 900 Saddletree Ct
SOMERSET ISD ADMIN BLDG.................................................................7791E. 6th, Somerset
SOUTHSIDE ISD ADMIN BLDG... (BOARD ROOM)..........................1460 Martinez-Losoya
SOUTH PARK MALL.........................................................................2310 S.W. Military
SOUTH SAN ANTONIO ISD ADMIN BLDG............................................5622 Ray Ellison
SOUTHWEST ISD ADMIN BLDG...................................................11914 Dragon Lane
THOUSAND OAKS/EL SENDERO LIBRARY...................................4618 Thousand Oaks
TOBIN LIBRARY @OAKWELL.....................................................4134 Harry Wurzbach
UNIVERSAL CITY LIBRARY.....................................................................100 Northview Dr.
UTSA (Bexar Room)...........................................................................1 UTSA Circle
WINDCREST TAKAS PARK CIVIC CENTER...........................................9310 Jim Seal Dr.
WONDERLAND MALL OF THE AMERICAS @ CROSSROADS............4522 Fredericksburg
Bexar County Justice Center closes at 6:00 p.m.
Also Closed Saturday
and Sunday
subject to change
Saturday, September 22, 2018
The Traffic Circle and New Scooter Law.
 |
| 78.1 |
Also if you happen to need to get something fix, please email me at sirbikesalot06@gmail.com or leave a message on FB or Twitter about the problem along with the picture of it. If it's not a useless bike lane, I'll post a similar call to action on this blog post FB and twitter feeds.
 |
| 78.2 |
Now I have another request to ask all my readers. The new e-scooter law that is expected to pass on October 11th will allow the use of e-scooters on sidewalks so long as they yield to pedestrians. My question is, why can't bicycles be treated the same way? Right now, and I have mention this many times, Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited makes it currently illegal to use your bicycle and e-scooters on the sidewalk. Well we as a community now has a chance to change the law and help those council members who said yes to removing that silly law from the books during the last municipal elections.
- (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or propel or park or stand any vehicle upon any sidewalk.
- (b) Law enforcement officers and emergency medical personnel while using bicycles provided by governmental agencies and while in the performance of their authorized duties are exempt from the provisions of subsection (a). Any person, while parking a bicycle in city installed bike racks, is also exempt from the provisions of this section.
I also ask everyone to please call or email or your Council member and let them know that bicycles should be allowed to use the sidewalks just like the e-scooters. Below you'll see my letter that I sent to our mayor, which I also left his official contact information, at the bottom of this story.
If you don't know who your council member is, please click here: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/Find-My-Council-Member
Also I posted the council member answer to question F. " Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk" below their contact info.
District 1: Roberto C. Treviño. Main office ph# 210-207-7279 Field office ph# 210-207-0900
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d1/Email-Form
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: Yes
Explanation: I would explore this but we must have a thoughtful discussion of equal access to all so that sidewalks are safe to elderly and disabled.
District 2: William H. ("Cruz") Shaw. Main office ph# 210-207-7278. Claude Black Comunity Center Field Office ph# 210-207-0950. Rittiman Field office ph# 210-207-0970.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d2/Contact?sendto=District2
District 3: Rebecca Viagran. Main Office ph# 210-207-7064. Constituent Office ph# 210-207-0969
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d3/Contact
District 4: Rey Saldaña. Main Office ph# 210-207-7281. Constituent Office ph# 210-207-0880
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d4/Contact?sendto=District4
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: Yes
Explanation:
District 5: Shirley Gonzales. Main Office ph# 210-207-7043. Collins Garden Library Field Office ph# 210-207-0960. Las Palmas Field Office ph# 210-207-0990.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d5/SuggestionBox
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: No (see explanation)
Explanation: In the existing environment, there are times and places where cyclists feel pressured to ride on the sidewalk, but an ordinance to allow riding on sidewalks does not address the underlying causes. Moreover, adopting such an ordinance may negatively impact the effort to improve cycling and walking in the city by tacitly acknowledging streets are the rightful domain of motorists, and that bicycles belong on sidewalks. My goal, and I would ask the cycling community to share this goal, is to make cycling safe and pleasant on every street. A street where a person feels it is prudent to ride on the sidewalk is indicative of a failing street, a street that needs redesign, not the adoption of an ordinance to permit riding bicycles on sidewalks.
District 6: Greg Brockhouse. Main office ph# 210-207-7065. Constituent Office ph# 210-207-3749.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d6/Contact?sendto=District6
District 7: Ana Sandoval. Main office ph# 210-207-7044. Centerview Field Office ph# 210-207-0870.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d7/About/Contact
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: NO
Explanation: We would need to evaluate bicycles on sidewalks on a case-by-case basis as it is important to balance pedestrian safety and bicycle safety.
District 8: Manny Pelaez. Main Office ph# 210-207-7086. Igo Library Field Office ph# 210-207-0943.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d8/Contact?sendto=District8
District 9: John Courage. Main Office Ph# 210-207-7325. Frost Bank Field Office Ph# 210-207-0955.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d9/Contact?sendto=district9
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: Yes
Explanation: YES.
District 10: Clayton Perry. Main Office ph# 210-207-7276. Constituent Office ph# 210-207-0994.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d10/Contact?sendto=district10
Mayor: Ron Nirenberg. Main Office ph# 210-207-7107.
Email: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Mayor/About/Contact?sendto=Mayor
F. Will you amend Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited, so people can ride their bicycles on the sidewalk?
Answer: No
Explanation: Bicycling on pedestrian pathways poses avoidable dangers to both pedestrians and cyclists. We should insist on separated bicycle lanes instead.
Images:
78.1: A picture of the traffic circle bicycle ramp taken on August 15, 2018. As you can clearly see, there's not much of a bicycle lane nor paint pointing the way.
78.2: A picture of the Traffic Circle bicycle ramp showing the band aid improvements that San Antonio TCI made.
My letter to the Mayor, Ron Nirenberg.
Dear Mr Nirenberg,
I hear that the new e-scooter law that will be voted on Octoboer 11, 2018 will include a provision to allow these vehicles to be used on the sidewalk so long as they yield to pedestrians. My question to you sir, why can't bicycles be allowed to do this as well?
The current law on the books, Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited states that:
- (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or propel or park or stand any vehicle upon any sidewalk.
- (b) Law enforcement officers and emergency medical personnel while using bicycles provided by governmental agencies and while in the performance of their authorized duties are exempt from the provisions of subsection (a). Any person, while parking a bicycle in city installed bike racks, is also exempt from the provisions of this section.
I can tell you from using a bicycle for daily commute and using the e-scooters that controlling a bicycle is way easier than an e-scooter. The e-scooters are much harder to control because you're using not just your legs to balance the vehicle, but also your hands on the handle bars and there has been more collisions with e-scooters with pedestrians then there has been with bicycles colliding with e-scooters.
I hope that when the rules governing these vehicles come out, they also include new rules to allow the many safe cyclist to use their bicycles on the sidewalk as well, so long as they yield to pedestrians.
Sincerely,
Daniel Day.
My Letter to SWell Cycle
To Whom it May Concern,
It has come to my attention that the new e-scooter law that is to be voted by the city council will allow these vehicle to use the sidewalks, so long as they yield to pedestrians. My question is this, why can't bicycles be also allowed to do the same?
The current law on the books, Sec. 19-286. Driving or parking on sidewalks prohibited states that:
- (a) It shall be unlawful for any person to drive or propel or park or stand any vehicle upon any sidewalk.
- (b) Law enforcement officers and emergency medical personnel while using bicycles provided by governmental agencies and while in the performance of their authorized duties are exempt from the provisions of subsection (a). Any person, while parking a bicycle in city installed bike racks, is also exempt from the provisions of this section.
I can tell you from using a bicycle for daily commute and using the e-scooters that controlling a bicycle is way easier than an e-scooter. The e-scooters are much harder to control because you're using not just your legs to balance the vehicle, but also your hands on the handle bars and there has been more collisions with e-scooters with pedestrians then there has been with bicycles colliding with e-scooters.
I ask the people at SWell Cycle to ask the city council that when they vote to allow e-scooters on the sidewalk, that they also allow not just your bicycles, but everyone who rides a bicycle on the sidewalks as well.
Sincerely,
Daniel Day.
Wednesday, September 12, 2018
The League of American Bicyclist is about to set back San Antonio again.
 |
| 77.1 |
Back in August, Alamo Area MPO sent a tweet (image 77.1) out about San Antonio again reapplying to the League of American Bicyclist to become Silver ranking as a bicyclist friendly city. I am here to warn people that if we win Silver status, then biking will get worse in San Antonio for the people who are in charge will use the status as a crutch not to improve the current situation.
I've been pointing out the fact that since the awarding of the Bronze Status, that we don't deserve it. When your city voted to remove a bike lane, I think that everyone would agree, you don't deserve to be marked as a Bicycle Friendly City. Since that time, the city pretty much stop painting bike lanes except if they were down neighborhood streets that didn't need them or in District 5. They also built a Protected bike lane and put it in a places where it didn't do any good plus the signal lights are timed in a way to to give cars a priority. The biggest complaint that I hear of is about cars parked in bike lanes. And the most unfriendly thing that TxDOT and San Antonio TCI refuse to do is to enact the Bicycle Master Plan.
 |
| 77.2 |
So how is the league coming to it's conclusion? They are using this chart (image 77.2) to determine our city status and the greatest flaw in this chart is that they're going to be counting a street like South Pine which doesn't need a bicycle lane. They're going to be counting the protected bicycle lanes along I-37 where the bicycle green light doesn't come on unless you push the beggars button. (image 77.4) They're going to be counting the bicycle lanes filled with parked cars. (image 77.3) They're going to be counting the miles and miles of trails that are illegal to use after dark because of Sec. 22-28. Public parks hours of operation and curfew. All the while ignoring the handful of needless deaths that their status leads to.
 |
| 77.3 |
So What's our real status as a bicycle friendly city? Back in May 2018, People's for Bikes came out with a new status based on actual metrics. Out of these measurements, the city of San Antonio ranked 1.5 Stars, just sightly higher than Houston, or Dallas. Fort Worth has a higher status of 2.2 and Austin is at 2.8.
And we're such a bicycle friendly city, that the latest hit and run case (and thank god that she's alive) is Samantha Flores, age 23. She's going to need help paying those medical bills, so please visit her gofunme page by clicking here.
We as a community need to fight this ranking because if we do manage to get Silver, you can kiss the ideal of protected bicycle lanes down Broadway, Austin Hwy, Commerce, Military, Fredricksburg Rd, or any other major stroad. You will see the City of San Antonio to continue to flaunt the new status, just as they flaunt the current status of Bronze as a bigger crutch to avoid putting down any new bicycle infrastructure. The City will even will go so far as removing it, like they recently did on Broadway at Jones, especially where they are needed.
 |
| 77.4 |
So What can you do to fight back against this false status? For starters, you can take some time out and fill out this survey by the League of American Bicyclist and let them know on question 6 that we don't deserve any friendly status.
Link to Survey: https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/app_BFC_FA18
Second, you can sign your name to this petition and share it with your friends and urge them to sign it. The more people who sign it, the better we are able to prove our case. To sign the petition, please click here.
Third thing you can do is to email the League of American Bicyclist, amelia@bikeleague.org and tell them your unfriendly story about our Bicycle Friendly city. I have a sample letter available by clicking here if you need help on writing your letter.
Fourth, you can contact Bike Texas by email mail@biketexas.org and let them know of your unfriendly experience of riding a bicycle. I have a sample letter available by clicking here if you need help on writing your letter.your own.
Fifth, You can call the two friendliest bicycle council ladies on the city council and let them know that if we remain a bicycle friendly city according to the League of American Bicyclist that San Antonio Transpiration and Capital Improvements will continue to drag it's feet when it comes to building necessary bicycling infrastructure.
Shirley Gonzales, District 5. Contact page: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d5/SuggestionBox
Main Office: 210-207-7043
Anna Sandoval, District 7. Contact Page: https://www.sanantonio.gov/Council/d7/About/Contact
Main Office: 210-207-7044
And that's all we can do folks. I can only hope that the league won't help Red McComes or Ancira car dealerships out by providing the City of San Antonio with a crutch to continue to remove or put in bicycle infrastructure that don't serve any purpose.
Images:
77.1: Tweet from Alamo Area MPO.
77.2: League Of American Bicyclist https://bikeleague.org/community
77.3: Complaint about the cars park in the bike lane on Dover Ridge on the Far West Side
77.4: A meme illustrating how wrong they time the bicycle lights here in San Antonio.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)