Those defending the Central Subway have stopped making public transportation or even merit based arguments for it. They are down to the threat card, a well used card on the local scene. Mayor Ed Lee publicly ridicules the citizens who volunteer their time for the Superior Court's Civil Grand Jury, as middle-brow folk "who do not know anything about transportation." In the past rational arguments for the subway have included: A) MUNI needs a "north-south" axis rather than a purely "east-west" focus. That's a good argument but BRTs (bus rapid transit) deliver the same punch at a fraction of the cost; B) the Central Subway was set in stone at the time of the Embarcadero Freeway demolition yet not one reporter has asked former Mayor Agnos on the record about this myth. No one has asked him, "Is it true, was the subway a quid pro quo for the Embarcadero Freeway?" No reporter who has followed politics has ever heard Agnos say that. It's never been in print, and it's a self-serving narrative crafted to snuff out consideration of transit alternatives.

Additionally, it's been 50 years now since progressives from Sue Bierman to Hayes Valley residents have rallied against freeway construction. From an urban planning perspective, building freeways went out with "redevelopment" and the Eisenhower Administration. To have rebuilt either the Embarcadero Freeway or the Central Freeway defines retro.

The weakest argument being tossed around on behalf of the Central Subway is that "all of the federal dollars will be lost." This is a "use it or lose it" threat to shut down any debate. Political hacks love this type of argument because it means they don't have to think about the meaning of their vote. As long Democrats hold the White House, and big donors continue to live and work in the San Francisco Bay Area (where was Obama this week? ) the federal allocation system can be "worked" to the advantage of this region. Politics is at the center of federal dollar allocations, especially in election years. The reality is more nuanced than the either/or account defender's of the Central Subway now suggest.

In fact, San Francisco could be handed a huge bill after 2012 depending upon how that election goes. Should Mitt Romey be elected in 2012 ( possible) and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky becomes Majority Leader (likely) and either Boehner remains Speaker (high probability) or is replaced by Cantor (possible), then Central Subway funding is toast. Republicans are never shy about defunding projects that benefit their opponents. California and certainly the Bay Area is not on the GOP electoral target list. In office, the GOP can adjust funding formulas to target San Francisco. Even with a Democratic President and Democratic controlled Senate, this already happening in Congress.

Many San Francisco residents support having say a $6 a gallon gasoline to pay for subsidies for mass transit like Europe and Japan have but that is not the reality. In the summer of 2011, the United States narrowly secured funding and reauthorization for the FAA and air traffic controllers. If the Central Subway project only gobbled up federal transit dollars that would be one thing, but add to that the liabilities of new SFMTA operational costs --estimated to be $15 million a year -- and probable project cost overruns and that means an already "challenged" MUNI system ends up with even more red ink. Today's MUNI service lines will have to eliminated to support a project which may serve as few as 40K people a day. In contrast, the 38 Geary line which desperately needs BRT, serves over 100K people daily. What is the transit justice in that? None. It's simply Outer Richmond, Richmond, Anza Vista, Western Addition, Japantown, Cathedral Hill, Lower Polk and Tenderloin residents --who are as diverse socio-economically as are those residents who live in the neighborhoods of South of Market, Mid Market, Union Square, Chinatown and North Beach do not have effective representatives or lobbyists with the same juice to advocate for their needs.

The Civil Grand Jury report is an 'interesting' read. As a Clipper Card holder; public transportation and bicycle are my modes of transportation; I frequently ride the 30 & 45, not my favorites. The majority of passengers tend to fall into two categories; tourists trying to get to the Wharf and neighborhood residents trying to get home or others trying to go shopping in Chinatown. Many of the latter are older or laden with bags etc. Apart from the myriad other problems with this proposal, it does not effectively serve either group. It is a rail line from 'nowhere to nowhere' requiring the elderly and disabled to walk a significant distance in order to connect with the rest of the BART or MUNI system. If it connected directly with the rest of our public transportation system, continued on down to the Wharf, that could be some improvement, but it is still a typical SF 'boondoggle'.
I'm glad you mentioned, and remember Sue Bierman. In 1994 she placed Proposition 0 on the ballot. This would have explored the possibility of creating a 'Downtown Transit Assessment District' requiring downtown corporations and business to "PAY THEIR FARE SHARE". Unfortunately a disinformation campaign was conducted by 'the usual suspects' and the measure was defeated. This is still an idea that deserves serious consideration, and could go a long way towards solving MUNI's financial problems and finally provide us with a Transportation system that actually serves the Public and possibly make it FREE; no need to pay cops or other enforcers salaries; eliminate infuriating delays while people search for change etc.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NmNIk_u5Ezy
One of Supervisor Jane Kim's campaign 'promises' was to explore this idea, I have also spoken to a couple of our other current Supervisors who have expressed an 'interest', though I am not aware of any discussion to date. There are any number of other practical and comparatively simple approaches to resolve many of our problems that don't require decades of disruption (Third Street White Rail) and actually improve the lives of the majority, but they are constantly thwarted by the Power Brokers; Speculators; Developers; Corporations; Beholden Politicians; Community 'leaders', and now this crop of Tea-baggers, etc; who do not have our best interests at heart or the long term sustainability of our communities, it's all about maximising profit whatever the cost.
Just my 2c
There is a wealth of information available on the web for any interested in learning more about the work of Sue Bierman in particular, and the decades long struggle to establish an efficient and user friendly transportation system in San Francisco.
For Example: :San Francisco Transit Fight"
http://www.uncanny.net/~wetzel/transfightforZ.html

While our event today doesn't speak directly to this issue, per se, hearing how mayoral candidates respond about our four-legged companions can help us as voters understand how a new mayor will operate if elected. Check it out.

WHAT: DogPAC of SF Mayoral Forum
WHEN: TODAY, October 1, 2011
TIME: 2-4pm
WHERE: Congregation Sha'ar Zahav
290 Dolores St @ 16th St
SF, CA 94103

Note: This location does not allow dogs except service animals. Thank you for your cooperation.