Author: Rahman Law PC

48% of Car Accidents in Los Angeles are Hit and Runs

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

The statistic really speaks for itself. Nearly half of Los Angeles car accidents, that 20,000 each year, are hit-and-runs.

That is a percentage completely off the charts. In the United States as a whole about 11% of crashes are hit and runs. The Los Angeles numbers are not even within the realm of reasonable. Los Angeles drivers are 4 1/2 times more likely to bail after an accident than drivers in the country on the whole. There are any number of reasons that the percentage in Los Angeles is so much higher, but two stick out. One, Los Angeles is a huge metropolis of nearly 3.8 million people. That is a lot of people. Two, Los Angeles has a car-centric culture. Southern Californians are quick to complain about public transportation and the highways are a landmark in and of themselves. The size of the city and surrounding suburbs and the sheer number of cars on the road probably contribute to the shocking 48% hit and runs.

Whatever the causal factors, 48% is much too high of a number. Los Angeles city, county and the police department need to focus more of their energies on an epidemic that is sweeping the city. These 20,000 hit and runs leave families torn apart and people disabled for the rest of their lives. Whether it is by dedicating more officers to investigating these hit and runs, or better yet devoting resources to determining what is fueling this culture and how to prevent hit and runs before they happen, Los Angeles cannot continue to ignore this alarming trend.

Source:

Nearly half of Los Angeles car accidents are hit-and-runs

http://www.laweekly.com/2012-12-06/news/los-angeles-hit-and-run-epidemic-4000-dead-injured/4/

Muni’s Wage Gap: Pricing Transportation for those Who Need it Most

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Muni is considering charging passengers based on income instead of just age.

Existing Muni monthly passes

Type Cost Discount Sales
Muni only adult $64 N/A 55,514
Muni adult with BART $74 -15.63% 28,356
Lifeline pass $32 50% 19,535
Senior pass $22 66% 16,577
Youth pass $22 66% 6,430
Disabled pass $22 66% 7,444

Currently, Muni Passes are priced as seen above, with youth and seniors receiving 66% discounts. However, after struggling with severe deficits for years many people agree that it is time for Muni and Bay Area public transit in general to change. Amidst this cry for reform, SFTMA has considered providing free Muni service for the city’s low-income youth. This ong0ing debate has also opened the door to discussion of a new income-based fare system. With the Clipper Card System in place, the infrastructure already exists to implement this type of tiered pricing system and the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is conducting a major study to see if this it is feasible. One major problem is the independent pricing systems of the MTC’s 26 transit agencies. All of these agencies would have to work together and agree on a single fare system.

“If our goal is to make transit accessible, especially for people of low income, it shouldn’t be based solely on age, either young or old,” Cheryl Brinkman, a member of the SFMTA board of directors commented. And she is right. It isn’t fair for a young service worker making minimum wage to pay the same for a Muni Pass as a 45 year old making over $100,000 a year. However, the logistics of this system need to be addressed. Is it feasible? What may be the affect on ridership? Who does it really benefit? The findings of the MTA study will be important in determining if such a system would be the right way to address the Bay Area’s transportation woes.

Source:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/transportation/2012/11/muni-and-other-agencies-consider-basing-fares-income

Woonerven- Walk SF’s Annual Member Party

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Walk SF has been working for a more walkable, liveable and safer city all year and now its time to celebrate a job well done and to rally for the volunteers for next year!

Join Walk SF at their  annual member party next Thursday, December 6th. Be sure to renew your membership or become a first-time member to gain admission to the party for you and a guest. You won’t want to miss this opportunity to hangout with people dedicated to making San Francisco a better city. In addition to the great company and conversation, be sure to stop by for the food, drinks and live music. Come celebrate another successful year with Walk SF!

We’ll see you there!

 

RSVP: http://woonerven.eventbrite.com/

 

 

No on Prop. 33- A Victory Repeated Election after Election

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Prop. 33 got overshadowed in all of the frenzy surrounding Propositions 30, 32 and 37 these past few months. However, the magnitude of the victory for California drivers that was the defeat of Prop. 33 on Tuesday cannot be overstated.

Proposition 33 was the brainchild of Mercury Insurance founder George Joseph. It was benignly advertised as a proposition that would allow insurance companies to set prices based on whether a driver had previously carried auto insurance. The benefits, the companies argued, were numerous. Namely, insurance companies would have to compete for new drivers. The proposition would allow the companies to offer proportional discounts for drivers with prior coverage.

In reality, Prop. 33 simply sought to undue the restrictions voters placed on automobile insurance companies in 1988 when they passed Proposition 103. Prop. 103  prevents insurance companies from discriminating against new customers simply because they have not had continuous insurance coverage. It does not prevent companies from offering loyalty discounts to their long-term customers. Prop. 33 isn’t the first time that the insurance companies have tried to loosen the Prop. 103 restrictions. Just two years ago, Prop. 17, also funded by the George Joseph, was on the ballot with an eerily similar purpose.  Mr. Joseph “has seemingly made it his mission in life to end [the restrictions placed on automobile insurance companies by Prop. 103], spending millions from his personal fortune to bankroll [the unsuccessful  propositions].”

According to the State Department of Insurance, if Propositions 17 or 33 had passed insurers would be able to offer drivers switching from one insurance company to another a new discount. In order to offset this discount, however, they would have to charge higher rates to customers who were seeking insurance for the first time, or after they had let their insurance lapse for a period longer than 90 days. This isn’t just speculation. It is fact. Insurance companies offering the new discount would have to “collect enough revenue to cover the risk of loss posed by the entire group of new customers.”

As a consequence of this need to hike prices for the newly insured, uninsured Californians would face higher premiums when they tried to get insured. Higher premiums for those least likely to be able to afford them, means less insured drivers on the road. Less insured drivers means higher premiums for those with insurance. It is a dangerous spiral and one which Californians have decided again and again and again to avoid completely.

College students across the state, many of whom have drivers licenses and clean driving records from their time spent driving in high school, would be one group who would be effected by the passage of Prop. 33 and other propositions like it. College students often let their car insurance lapse when they are living on or near campus for four years. If Prop. 103 was gutted, as Props. 17 and 33 attempted to do, these new graduates would face higher premiums because they had let their insurance lapse during a period when they were not driving.

In spite of the absurd amounts of money poured into the fight for this proposition (mostly by one man), California voters saw through the facade much like they did in 2010. This is a huge victory for drivers throughout the state. Those with insurance will continue to be eligible for loyalty discounts, and those without insurance can be confident that when they do seek coverage they will not be paying extra to support discounts for those few switching insurance companies.

So much for the good news. The bad news: it is almost a guarantee that a similar proposition will find its way onto a ballot in the next few years. Whether its Prop 17, 33, 70 or 54, we can only hope that Californians will continue to see past the deceitful rehotric paid for by the insurance companies, and will continue to do what is best for California Drivers.

 Sources:

http://stopprop33.consumerwatchdogcampaign.org/story/prop-33-likely-produce-more-not-fewer-uninsured-drivers

http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/college-students-speak-out-no-on-prop-33-177090111.html That is why college newspapers across the state urged students to vote no on Prop 33.

http://www.sfgate.com/opinion/editorials/article/Prop-33-a-bad-idea-that-won-t-go-away-3866761.php

http://stopprop33.consumerwatchdogcampaign.org/story/no-proposition-33-auto-insurance-initiative-was-bad-idea-two-years-ago-its-still-bad-idea

Investment Woes…

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

San Francisco has some tough choices to make about its investment in transportation over the next 30 years. The numbers are clear. Between now and 2040, the region will receive $64 billion in transportation funds. According to the SF Examiner, “$9 billion has already been locked in to projects, including the Central Subway, the Transbay Transit Center and the Doyle Drive rebuild at the Golden Gate Bridge. Another $51 billion is socked away for routine maintenance and operation services.” That leaves a meager $3.2 billion over 30 years for new projects. To put this in perspective, it is estimated that the City has between $10 billion and $12 billion in needs over the next three decades, leaving the region with a shortfall of about $9 billion.

This shortfall means that the city faces some tough decisions. Does it completely revitalize Muni to bring the system up to the international level at a coat of $3 billion leaving nothing for other projects? Or does it focus on carpool lanes at the expense of separated bike lanes?

The San Francisco County Transportation Authority is asking for input on which projects are most important to citizens. They have set up a website www.sfbudgetczar.com to streamline this input process.

Source:

http://www.sfexaminer.com/local/transportation/2012/11/san-francisco-faces-tough-transportation-investment-choices

SFMTA Revamps its Traffic Calming Program

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

After putting its Traffic Calming Program on hold for a year, SFMTA has announced that its new, revamped program should be up and running by Spring 2013. The Traffic Calming Program is part of the city’s ‘Livable Streets effort’. The SFMTA began the program over 10 years ago to address citizens’ requests for the implementation of traffic-safety measures in their neighborhoods.

The original program, while admirable, was seriously flawed. First, a resident would have to submit a request for a traffic calming measure for their neighborhood. Once the request was reviewed and accepted it was placed on a waiting list. Once on this waiting list, the project was ranked based on the number of accidents in the area, the severity of the speeding problem and a number of other factors. Once a project was ranked it would have to work its way to the top of the list, competing with newer, higher ranked programs along the way. Once the project reached the top of the list, a feat that could take more than three years, the two year long planning and implementation process would begin. Needless to say, the backlog was absurd and the entire system needed to be overhauled. The SFMTA itself described the system as a dam.

How the SFMTA ‘Traffic Calming Project’ Functioned in the Past

The new plan will nix the waiting list. Instead, “planners [will] select a yearly round of projects based on the severity of speeding and crashes. If an application doesn’t rank as a top priority, but does meet the minimum threshold for consideration, it would be placed on hold for two years. If the application still doesn’t reach priority ranking within two years, the SFMTA [will] drop the application.” The new system eliminates the potential for projects in never-ending limbo. It streamlines the process, by combining the approval process and the waiting list. Instead of being approved, being ranked, being put on a waiting list and then working up to the top of the list, only to go through a long planning process, the new program will assess the projects as they are submitted, look at all of the proposals at once and pick 25 locations to work on over the next year. Once the locations are selected the town halls and community meetings will begin. Within 11 months the project will be completed.

New Traffic Calming Project Process

Instead of spending years considering multiple solutions to relatively simply speeding problems, the new process will consider simple, effective and relatively cheap solutions like the Chicane and Speed Hump.

Traffic Calming Measures

Although the system is bound to have disadvantages, everyone agrees that the program needed to be redesigned. Now we will have to wait and see how it all goes….

 

Sources:

http://www.sfmta.com/cms/ocalm/13568.html

http://sf.streetsblog.org/2012/10/18/sfmta-reveals-strategy-to-streamline-traffic-calming-projects/

 

Green Connections

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Green Connections is a two year project that will “increase access to parks, open space and the waterfront, by re-envisioning City streets and paths as ‘green connectors’. This project builds on current efforts to create sustainable corridors that enhance mobility, green neighborhood streets, and improve pedestrian and bicycle access to community amenities and recreational opportunities.”

 

The Wayfinding Signs recently implemented by the SFMTA for the Americas Cup are one crucial part of this plan. The signs tell distance in time rather than miles. This trend puts San Francisco in the same boat as many other tourist-heavy cities since the signs allow people to better judge the advantages of walking. Especially in a city like San Francisco where walking is often not easy and flat, having estimated times can be encouraging.

These signs have been implemented in many of the more tourist-central areas like Fisherman’s Wharf and Union Square. The goal is to create a network around and within the city with pedestrian and cycling friendly walks connecting many of San Francisco’s major sights much as is envisioned in the following map.

 

 

Source:

http://sf.streetsblog.org/2012/09/27/wayfinding-signs-a-nice-touch-for-the-developing-green-connections-plan/

http://www.sf-planning.org/index.aspx?page=3002

Supervisorial Candidates Debate Streets, Parks, and Public Space at Upcoming Forums and Town Hall Meetings

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

Walk San Francisco, the San Francisco Parks Alliance, and Friends of the Urban Forest are pleased to announce a series of  Supervisorial Candidate Forums and Town Halls focusing exclusively on the topic of the city’s public space: streets and parks.  Our goal is to ensure that strong voices for a greener, more walkable city are elected across the city’s districts.

WHAT:           

For the first time, Supervisorial town halls and candidate forums in all odd-numbered SF districts will focus on issues of public space from streets to parks.

Residents are invited to submit their questions on pedestrian safety, sustainable transportation, trees and urban forestry, parks, recreation, open space, and greening.

WHEN, WHO, AND WHERE:

Wednesday, October 17, 7 – 8 p.m.
District 9 Town Hall with Supervisor David Campos
Moderated by Elizabeth Stampe, Executive Director, Walk San Francisco
Mission Recreation Center, 2450 Harrison St. at 20th

Thursday, October 18, 7 – 8 p.m.
District 11 (Excelsior) Town Hall with Supervisor Avalos
Moderated by Elizabeth Stampe, Executive Director, Walk San Francisco
Minnie Lovie Ward Recreation Center, Montana between Plymouth & Capitol

Thursday, October 25, 6:30 – 8:30 p.m.
District 3 (Chinatown/North Beach) Forum with Candidates Marc Bruno, Joseph Butler, David Chiu, and Wilma Pang
Moderated by Matthew O’Grady, Executive Director, San Francisco Parks Alliance
Betty Ann Ong Chinese Recreation Center, 1199 Mason St. at Washington St.

Tuesday, October 30, 6 – 8 p.m.
District 7 (Sunnyside) Forum with Candidates Francis Xavier Crowley, Joel Engardio, Michael Garcia, Julian Lagos, and Norman Yee
Moderated by Dan Flanagan, Executive Director, Friends of the Urban Forest
San Francisco Zoo’s Great Hall, Sloat Blvd. and 47th Ave.

Thursday, November 1, 6 – 8 p.m.
District 5 (Hayes Valley/Haight) Forum with Candidates London Breed, Julian Davis, Christina Olague, and Andrew Resignato
Moderated by Matthew O’Grady, Executive Director, San Francisco Parks Alliance
Hamilton Recreation Center, Geary Blvd. at Steiner

### 

Walk San Francisco (WalkSF.org) and its members are making San Francisco a more welcoming place for everyone to walk. Walk SF speaks up for the safety and priority of pedestrians, and works to reclaim streets as shared public space.

 

San Francisco Parks Alliance’s (SFParksAlliance.org) mission is to inspire and promote civic engagement and philanthropy to protect, sustain and enrich San Francisco parks and green open spaces.

 

Friends of the Urban Forest’s (FUF.net) mission is to promote a larger, healthier urban forest as part of San Francisco’s green infrastructure through community planting, tree care, education, and advocacy.

Walk to School Day 2012 Success!

Posted on by Rahman Law PC

State and city leaders walked with students to school to celebrate SF’s status as the first California city to adopt safer school zones citywide. 

Walk to School 2012

“This year, San Francisco became the state’s first city to create 15-mile-per-hour speed limits citywide, at 181 schools. At Buena Vista Horace Mann, 23% of the students live within one mile of school and 19% walk, according to the San Francisco Department of Public Health (SFDPH). Citywide, 42% of all students live within walking distance of school, but only 25% of students walk. SFDPH works with 15 elementary schools in its Safe Routes to School program to encourage walking and biking, as one important way to increase children’s daily physical activity.”

On Wednesday, International Walk to School Day, a record 8,500 students walked to school with their families in San Francisco.

“We Love Walking to School”

“Lower traffic speeds make streets safer,” said Elizabeth Stampe, executive director of Walk San Francisco, which led the campaign for the 15-mile-per-hour zones. “The new school zones are calming traffic to make the city more livable and walkable for everyone. We’re encouraging cities throughout California to follow San Francisco’s lead.”

Source: 

Walk San Francisco (WalkSF.org)