Well said Joe Simitian. This pretty much clinches it. There will be no organized outrage to his very truthful comments because the overwhelming majority of citizens know he is spot on correct. BRT is hated by the masses and will only cause VTA to lose money(and votes for future money).

Get off the dead horse VTA. It's not taking you anywhere. It's already cost you the upcoming transit tax vote.

Direct Quote from Joe Simitian:

"In sum, Dedicated Lane BRT is a costly project, of dubious merit, without proof of concept, without broad public support, a history of delays on the current effort and the potential to scuttle a larger countywide effort to provide meaningful congestion relief -- when there are better, less expensive options available."

I knew we had an ally against this VTA plan of stupidity when I spoke with him.

We could have saved a lot of this mess if Rosenberg ans Showalter hadn't decided to flip-flop on their promises to the voters, but their comeuppance is on the horizon.

Joe came up with a clear summary of the reasons why the lane closure idea would be an expensive disaster - $233 million or more, spent to gridlock El Camino. I'm sure he has been hearing from large numbers of irate constituents on this.

I agree that VTA's upcoming tax measure will be in trouble if they continue trying to cram this proposal down our throats.

It looks like VTA may see reason and go for a more modest version of BRT, but I wouldn't take that for granted just yet.

If you don't want two lanes on El Camino closed permanently to autos, please write Joe Simitian (Web Link and any other VTA members and tell them so. You can email comments for the VTA board to: board.secretary@vta.org

Looks like the paid VTA shill has no answer to this one. Put a fork in it.

Joe's statement is unsurprising considering his record on transit. He helped craft and support the HSR plan for the peninsula and then traded that support for campaign support and finance. Unreported soft money funding decides these elections and certain wealthy NIMBY's have agreed to help him buy votes if he backpedals on the BRT program.

The dedicated lane will provide fast and efficient public transit to El Camino with only a small delay for the hordes of automobiles clogging our roadways. That has been proven twice now without a single study that proves the contrary.

Busses tend to be ridden by the less "economically fortunate", so it is not surprising that wealthy, white NIMBY's would oppose this project and bribe elected officials to vote against their conscience. Mountain View Council voted its support, so it's time to move on. Don't let Joe buy an election by ruining our transit infrastructure!

Joe speaks truth:
"In sum, Dedicated Lane BRT is a costly project, of dubious merit, without proof of concept, without broad public support, a history of delays on the current effort and the potential to scuttle a larger countywide effort to provide meaningful congestion relief -- when there are better, less expensive options available."

BRT is now dead, as is the funding for VTA. This has blown up in their collective faces.

The joke of their in-process attempt at BRT is still a total joke with no end in sight. As we all knew to begin with, this BRT plan is a complete failure of an idea. Only the bloated overpaid bureaucrats in VTA's management could have come up with this one. I'm glad it's dead and I'm glad VTA stinks like a pig again...again!

Joe Simitian did not speak up until the overwhelming grass roots opposition to BRT made their voices heard. He represents the voice of the majority of the people. He is succinct when he says:

"The goal, of course, is to encourage a significant number of people to get out of their cars and onto buses. But the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)'s own independent third-party analysis says that, "Such high mode shifts are uncommon." And even project advocates acknowledge that the projected increase in riders may be decades away, if it occurs.

There's also the potential for traffic congestion along El Camino to get even worse, which seems probable if you eliminate one of three lanes running in each direction. Indeed, the draft environmental impact report (DEIR) indicates that a Dedicated Lane BRT would result in "significant and unavoidable impacts" on traffic."

There yo have it in a nut shell. Its bad for the overwhelming majority and even with BRT, ridership won't likely go up so it just makes things bad for no reason, this is stated by VTA themselves so now Joe had to speak up about the terrible plan and make it go away.

So we have one supe who makes decisions based on common sense. What about the others. This is such a silly idea promoted by greedy people at the VTA. Shame on them .

Joe's statement is unsurprising considering his record on transit. He helped craft and support the HSR plan for the peninsula and then traded that support for campaign support and finance. Unreported soft money funding decides these elections and certain wealthy NIMBY's have agreed to help him buy votes if he backpedals on the BRT program.

The dedicated lane will provide fast and efficient public transit to El Camino with only a small delay for the hordes of automobiles clogging our roadways. That has been proven twice now without a single study that proves the contrary.

Busses tend to be ridden by the less "economically fortunate", so it is not surprising that wealthy, white NIMBY's would oppose this project and bribe elected officials to vote against their conscience. Mountain View Council voted its support, so it's time to move on. Don't let Joe buy an election by ruining our transit infrastructure!

To "Politics" or whoever posted the same pro-lane closure thing twice:

What the heck are you talking about? You wrote:

"certain wealthy NIMBY's have agreed to help him buy votes if he backpedals on the BRT program." and,

"so it is not surprising that wealthy, white NIMBY's would oppose this project and bribe elected officials to vote against their conscience."

What?

Do you have any shred of evidence for this?

And by the way, I think it's time we disqualified use of the term "NIMBY" in rational discourse.

As he is what he is, he will now be called the Voice of One, of VoO for short.
There are always a few who will invent any argument to fit their beliefs...as the VoO, though, he will entertain, not influence. BRT is dead, and good riddance. The VoO is still here to play with though.

Supervisor Simitian is doing a good job (as is MV Councilman Siegel) in advocating a reasonable (small millions-of-dollars) approach to improving rapid public bus transportation. I think we can contrast that to former Councilwoman Margaret Abe-Koga's unflinching support for the VTA staff's multi-hundred million dollar plan. Web Link

Mercury News columnist Herhold - who was never elected to anything - is now on His Soapbox that we really ought to support the VTA staff. No thanks Scott!

It is easy to see that this 'no way to vta' person is posting his opposition over and over again. Very tiring to wade through his garbage, but it is transparent enough and fooling no one.

I have also heard that Joe Simitian is trading favors for political goals. This is not new for many politicians and he is no exception.

What is obvious is that if this so-called "compromise" situation is done and traffic is not somehow magically a lot better, the naysayers will jump up and down screaming "SEE! I TOLD YOU SO!"

Actually, it is VTA's own study that TOLD YOU SO. Sharing a bus lane with automobiles is ludicrous and the data forecast shows small improvement in transit speed.

Don't forget, Joe Simitian insisted on electrification of caltrain to benefit the wealthy commuters between SF and the Valley. How much is that costing??!! "$1.47 - $1.51 billion" is the current estimate. Watch that go up and up.

And now the affluent are refusing to allow a massive improvement along El Camino?!!! The BRT project is a fraction of CalTrain's electrification project, yet BRT will benefit several TIMES more riders than CalTrain!

So, what is the difference? Wealth = Power.

Time to stop (or at least slow down) class warfare and allow those that have not multimillionaires to get some benefit too!

Same person
a resident of Whisman Station:

"It is easy to see that this 'no way to vta' person is posting his opposition over and over again. Very tiring to wade through his garbage, but it is transparent enough and fooling no one."

~~~~~~~~~~

If you are implying that I have used multiple monikers in this, or any other thread...that is a LIE. I posted the lead post in this thread, and now this reply. Nothing else in this thread was posted by me.

Your accusations are telling, however.

#MirrorMirror

I just have to note that with the proposed trial, actual BRT service would begin operating maybe 2 years earlier than VTA could possibly complete construction. The current 522 runs to San Jose from Palo Alto in 60 minutes, while 22 takes 80. With the improvements proposed in the trial, and with others that VTA has planned, that's fast enough.

Seriously, the center lane plane would at best get down to 45 minutes for the trip and it does so by limiting stops to one every 2 miles and forcing riders to cross traffic to board in the median.

Who says that's better? The trial looks faster, and sooner, and overall better.

I am also opposed to BRT. I ride with the same folks each morning. None of them have expressed support for BRT and some are very angry at how it would cut service for the in-town riders. Its not a good idea at all, even from my perspective of looking out a VTA bus window.

I ride the bus every day and most are in favor of the center bus lane. Many of my friends would ride the bus if it weren't for the fact that automobiles have massively slowed down the bus lines.

Just this morning, I looked out the 522 window and saw most cars contained just a single occupant! Very wasteful.

This evening, we had to blast our horn to get this car out of the bus stop!!!! This girl was just sitting there on her phone. There are too many drivers who will break the law and use the "mixed" lane during rush hour. That is a fact.

Go on 85 and see how many non-HOV'ers are bypassing traffic in the left lane.

...and you complained about others suspected of pretending to be different people? hahaha :)

So, yah, BRT is dead, that's the last laugh on that moronic plan. I just wish they would release the NAMES at VTA who thought this was a good idea. They should be removed because of this egregious wasting of our money.

This is exactly why the VTA will get no vote from me for any funding or tax.

Of course the bus riders all support BRT. I feel for you, but we're still talking about a small constituency. VTA 522 only runs once every 15 minutes. In order to justify BRT, i.e. have the bus lane carry as many people as a car lane, we'd need a bus every two minutes or so. We would get that many riders if El Camino were surrounded by 5--10 story buildings within a quarter-mile on either side. But that is simply not happening.

A bit of a correction-- VTA is targeting 10 minute headways for the BRT:
Web Link

I have been opposed to the BRT proposal but am trying to find the upsides. 10 minute headway makes a big difference because it means I don't need to know the bus schedule, I'll just go to the station and wait a bit.

If the BRT lanes are in the median, I hope we can get pedestrian overpasses as a part of the development. It would be great to be able to cross El Camino at Castro and Showers without having to wait for the light. With a median lane and no pedestrian walkway, the pedestrians and bus would be perfectly mistimed at every drop off and pick up-- passengers would get off the bus, then wait a light cycle before the next leg of their trip.

No, the local bus riders, as myself, do not all support BRT. It will REDUCE local service, so obviously this is not a good idea if you use the bus locally within MV. I ride the bus and I oppose BRT.

Joe lied in his opinion piece:

"And along the corridor, the affected communities are clearly skeptical. In the cities to the north of Santa Clara relying on El Camino (Palo Alto, Los Altos, Los Altos Hills, Mountain View and Sunnyvale), not a single city council has mustered an absolute majority vote in support."

Mountain View City Could council voted its support. Some would argue that Joe is uninformed, so doesn't realize that MV has already settled the issue. However, I'm of the belief that he is politically astute and willing to lie to reach the Senate.

I was unsure about the dedicated center bus lane, but since the only opposition comes from people like Joe that lie and mislead, there must be legitimacy behind the project. Otherwise, deception would not necessary. Why lie if there are facts to support their anti-bus philosophy?

Web Link


Absolute Majority Law & Legal Definition


"Absolute majority refers to a majority of all those who are entitled to vote in a particular election, whether or not they actually cast ballots. It can be a number of votes totaling over 50 per cent, such as the total number of votes or seats obtained by a party that beats the combined opposition. Generally, absolute majority means more than half of the group stands together for the same matter"

The dedicated lane vote was not passed by an "absolute majority" in Mountain View. In fact it was passed with a minority of council votes. Mountain View city council has seven members, an absolute majority would have required five council members to have voted for the plan, instead the vote was 3 council members voted for the plan, two council meets recused themselves and two council members voted no. The council members who recused themselves were legally entitled to cast their votes.

Absolute majority would have required FOUR votes, note five. My bad.

The VTA seems to have no clue as to the hatred they are nourishing against themselves as an agency. They need to be fed by the voters, but the hand that feeds also slaps.

I keep hearing that center lane BRT will reduce Palo Alto to San Jose travel times, but what percentage of riders actually ride the whole length of the route? Most riders I know are going a shorter distance where the choice of 522 vs. 22 is based on which bus appears first and that assumes both origin and destination are on the 522. I don't know anyone thrilled about a concept that separates the routes.

@ Steve Ly


Steve, if you ask VTA they will tell you the average rider is on the bus for about 10 minutes. They have no clue of how many riders ride from east SJ to PA. The chart they produced showing the time savings from East SJ to PA is useless since most if not all riders do not ride that far on the route. Reason, there are alternatives that would take less time. Hence the alleged time savings are pure fantasy.