Letters from our Readers: As planned, new subway doesn’t benefit riders 

It seems to me, as a transportation planner, that the new Central Subway station at Union Square would have a great majority of its riders transferring. Said differently, close to everyone riding the T line at Union Square would not stay on board because BART, Muni’s other lines and shopping at Union Square would be the reason they took the T. In reverse, they would use the T coming from the shopping area, BART and Muni’s other lines to go either south or north.

The smarter move would be to mimic what most T passengers want to do. This would save the passengers a lot of hassle and quite a bit of time. A T line ending at Market Street and therefore not diving under the deep BART line would fit that bill, with a very short transfer distance (about 300 feet) from that last T-line stop in the South of Market area to walk to the transit mezzanine at Powell Street.

A separate solution for accessing Chinatown and beyond can be envisioned, but it is a separate transit issue. Muni got to this deep-diving solution because it wanted to kill two birds with one stone. But that political solution is not the most beneficial way for the passengers to fit their actual needs.

Fredrick Schermer, San Francisco 

China fueling rail project

The California High-Speed Rail Authority’s plan to bankrupt California with another $100 billion of unnecessary debt is apparently financed and lent to California by the Chinese government.

And there are no jobs for American union workers on this project, unless you happen to speak Chinese and read instructions in Chinese, because the Chinese government is the only entity willing to lend California money to build this boondoggle.

So Chinese workers will build high-speed rail trains and tracks in China, and then import Chinese workers to lay those tracks here in California. After all, would you take a risk on a “translation issue” when high-speed rail trains are supposed to travel 250 mph?

Mike Brown, Burlingame

How state can reduce costs

Sacramento needs better management of resources — creating a rainy-day fund and correcting state pensions. The state must end annual spending that exceeds revenue and inflation, and ease regulations that drive out businesses and tax revenue.

California owns 22,272 buildings, facilities and structures, including the Los Angeles Coliseum and the Cow Palace. Some can be sold and leased back, as other states are doing.

The state budget includes 500 departments, agencies and commissions with 240,579 of the highest-paid state employees in America — $19 billion a year plus benefits. A four-day week could save $4 billion annually. This 20 percent cut is far less than the 100 percent faced by 2 million unemployed Californians in the private sector.

Mike DeNunzio, Chairman, Republican Assembly, San Francisco

About The Author

Staff Report

Staff Report

Bio:
A daily newspaper covering San Francisco, San Mateo County and serving Alameda, Marin and Santa Clara counties.
Pin It
Favorite

Speaking of...

More by Staff Report

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Sunday, Dec 11, 2016

Videos

Most Popular Stories

© 2016 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation