<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: OAC Judgment Day is Postponed, But Draws Near</title>
	<atom:link href="http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/</link>
	<description>Transportation and urban planning in the San Francisco Bay Area</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 05 Jan 2012 19:20:09 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Is the Oakland Airport Connector Dead? &#171; Transbay Blog</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8319</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Is the Oakland Airport Connector Dead? &#171; Transbay Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 22 Feb 2010 15:42:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8319</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] funding to include not just BART, but also MTC.  After all, MTC has repeatedly proven itself more than willing to fund the Airport Connector, oblivious and/or indifferent to any Title VI deficiencies.  Why did MTC, before eagerly dishing [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] funding to include not just BART, but also MTC.  After all, MTC has repeatedly proven itself more than willing to fund the Airport Connector, oblivious and/or indifferent to any Title VI deficiencies.  Why did MTC, before eagerly dishing [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: FTA Rejects Federal Stimulus Funding for BART Oakland Airport Connector &#171; Transbay Blog</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8265</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[FTA Rejects Federal Stimulus Funding for BART Oakland Airport Connector &#171; Transbay Blog]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:29:25 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8265</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[[...] eligible for critical federal funding that BART needs in order to construct the project.  MTC had previously planned to evaluate BART&#8217;s proposed Title VI action plan at a special meeting on February 17, but now [...]]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] eligible for critical federal funding that BART needs in order to construct the project.  MTC had previously planned to evaluate BART&#8217;s proposed Title VI action plan at a special meeting on February 17, but now [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Felicity Barringer</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8220</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Felicity Barringer]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 01 Feb 2010 23:34:55 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8220</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[A little more on the blow-by-blow objections to BART&#039;s equity review in Armand Emamdjomeh&#039;s post on the NYT Bay Area blog. http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/could-70-million-for-the-oakland-airport-connector-be-better-spent/]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>A little more on the blow-by-blow objections to BART&#8217;s equity review in Armand Emamdjomeh&#8217;s post on the NYT Bay Area blog. <a href="http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/could-70-million-for-the-oakland-airport-connector-be-better-spent/" rel="nofollow">http://bayarea.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/01/could-70-million-for-the-oakland-airport-connector-be-better-spent/</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: david vartanoff</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8216</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[david vartanoff]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 31 Jan 2010 00:04:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8216</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[&quot;the fix was in&quot;  Yup, MTC, a wholly owned subsidiary of BART whose primary mission is construction contracts for politically connected firms -- functional transit optional.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>&#8220;the fix was in&#8221;  Yup, MTC, a wholly owned subsidiary of BART whose primary mission is construction contracts for politically connected firms &#8212; functional transit optional.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Dave C.</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8206</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Dave C.]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 22:04:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8206</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[In my head, I&#039;ve started thinking of the MTC as a &quot;death panel&quot; for local mass transit agencies. Every sinister fantasy Republicans had about rationing in the health care system is embodied in the MTC: it&#039;s an unelected, unaccountable panel of bureacrats making life-or-death decisions about which transit agencies get to live and which ones get no treatment.

For much of the meeting, I was standing in the corner of the room where Dugger and James Fang and Carol Ward Allen et al. were sitting, and the cronyism was palpable, as union officials and politicians and other movers and shakers came up to greet the BART officials, and they all literally patted one another on the back. Given their cheerful, smug mood before the meeting even started, it was obvious that they knew that the fix was in. I guess I shouldn&#039;t have been surprised, but somehow I thought that in this case the MTC might actually make the right decision becaose of the combination of (a) a flagrantly lousy project to begin with and (b) the FTA&#039;s extremely explicit warning in its Jan. 15th letter.

What I found most galling, perhaps, was that none of the speakers supporting the OAC even attempted to claim that it would actually provide any benefits to passengers. There was vague talk about how it would be a &quot;legacy&quot; handed down to future generations, and how it would somehow miraculously transform Oakland into a &quot;world-class city,&quot; but I don&#039;t think even Dugger tried to argue that it would make a trip to the airport any easier (it certainly won&#039;t make it cheaper either). If job-creation is the only real rationale for a project, then you might as well build something that doesn&#039;t replicate an existing service at double the cost. It&#039;s so infuriating!

(My blood starts to boil whenever I start writing about this, so I better go think about something else for a while...)]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In my head, I&#8217;ve started thinking of the MTC as a &#8220;death panel&#8221; for local mass transit agencies. Every sinister fantasy Republicans had about rationing in the health care system is embodied in the MTC: it&#8217;s an unelected, unaccountable panel of bureacrats making life-or-death decisions about which transit agencies get to live and which ones get no treatment.</p>
<p>For much of the meeting, I was standing in the corner of the room where Dugger and James Fang and Carol Ward Allen et al. were sitting, and the cronyism was palpable, as union officials and politicians and other movers and shakers came up to greet the BART officials, and they all literally patted one another on the back. Given their cheerful, smug mood before the meeting even started, it was obvious that they knew that the fix was in. I guess I shouldn&#8217;t have been surprised, but somehow I thought that in this case the MTC might actually make the right decision becaose of the combination of (a) a flagrantly lousy project to begin with and (b) the FTA&#8217;s extremely explicit warning in its Jan. 15th letter.</p>
<p>What I found most galling, perhaps, was that none of the speakers supporting the OAC even attempted to claim that it would actually provide any benefits to passengers. There was vague talk about how it would be a &#8220;legacy&#8221; handed down to future generations, and how it would somehow miraculously transform Oakland into a &#8220;world-class city,&#8221; but I don&#8217;t think even Dugger tried to argue that it would make a trip to the airport any easier (it certainly won&#8217;t make it cheaper either). If job-creation is the only real rationale for a project, then you might as well build something that doesn&#8217;t replicate an existing service at double the cost. It&#8217;s so infuriating!</p>
<p>(My blood starts to boil whenever I start writing about this, so I better go think about something else for a while&#8230;)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Andy K</title>
		<link>http://transbayblog.com/2010/01/28/oac-judgment-day-is-postponed-but-draws-near/#comment-8205</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Andy K]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:11:52 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://transbayblog.com/?p=5365#comment-8205</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I am starting to hope that MTC goes ahead and gives the $ to OAC, only to have the FTA take it away.  This would blow the lid off what goes on at the MTC - an organization with huge power, that few people know much about.  $70m is a high price to pay, but it might be worth the price - in the long run.]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I am starting to hope that MTC goes ahead and gives the $ to OAC, only to have the FTA take it away.  This would blow the lid off what goes on at the MTC &#8211; an organization with huge power, that few people know much about.  $70m is a high price to pay, but it might be worth the price &#8211; in the long run.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

