Muni should be funded by people who ride it 

If I understand it right, 40 percent of San Francisco’s middle and high school students take Muni to school and 60 percent take it home. And now there is a proposal that they should ride for free.

Meantime, the politicians continue raising parking meter fees and parking ticket fines. They are experimenting with prorated meters depending on the time of day and the area where they are located. The City takes in an average total of $181,000 for daily holiday parking violations and $105,000 average daily nonholiday parking violations. That adds up to millions of dollars per year just in parking fines.

Once again we are being told that the people who do not ride Muni should pay for the people who do. Only in San Francisco! It’s time for Muni to start collecting every rider’s fare.

Joe Koman, San Francisco

No reason in mayor’s race

Kudos to Ken Garcia for his Thursday column indicting the ranked-choice-voting charade. As sound as his arguments are, perhaps even more confusing to voters is the absence of soundly reasoned campaign discourse — the linchpin of a healthy democracy.

I’ve witnessed several candidate “forums” this season. No logic, no evidence, no depth, no rebuttal and often little candidate consistency from one forum to the next. We don’t need 30 candidates, or 11. We need two candidates, respectfully and clearly stating their positions then defending them with logic and evidence. Democracy does not thrive by sound bite.

J. Jay Lampus, San Francisco

Lee’s breach of contract

Verbal contracts are binding in California. Ed Lee entered into a contract when he agreed that if the Board of Supervisors appointed him interim mayor, he would not run for the office in November. The board met its obligation under the contract, but Ed Lee breached the contract by running for office. Perhaps a civil court could enforce the agreement Ed Lee lacks the integrity to keep.

Jay W. Ensley, San Francisco

Proposition B a shell game

Proposition B is not really about bonds for road maintenance. If it were, it would say which roads will not be repaved if it fails. And if a bond is needed, why don’t we also vote on the Doyle Drive upgrade or the new Central Subway line?
Prop. B is simply about increasing taxes to all San Franciscans so that the money that should be used for road maintenance can simply be redirected to other pet projects.

For me to vote yes on Prop. B or to vote for any of the politicians that support this shell game would mean I am clueless.

Rich Knittel, San Francisco

About The Author

Examiner Readers

Pin It

More by Examiner Readers

Latest in Letters to the Editor

Tuesday, Jul 25, 2017


Most Popular Stories

© 2017 The San Francisco Examiner

Website powered by Foundation