Croix de Mount Davis? 19 Innings of Oakland Athletics Baseball

While I will always be a Giants fan and earned my Croix de Candlestick buttons for surviving extra innings during a night game at Candlestick, it's amazing to see how the Oakland A's can pull off a difficult feat very early this morning.

From 7PM to 1:40AM, the Oakland Athletics and Los Angeles Angels played 19 innings of baseball until a two run home run finally ended the game with Oakland winning 10 to 8.  While 19 innings did not make the Major League record books for longest game ever, it did make Oakland A's history.

While the hardcore fans did stay for all the fun at the Colosseum, it's too bad some had to leave in the middle of the game because the last BART trains were to arrive at the station to take people back home.  With the game finishing near 2AM, I hope people were able to get a taxicab or get a ride from someone to get home, or wait a couple of extra hours for BART service to reopen this morning.

Lastly, for those who attended the game and survived 19 innings wouldn't it be nice if the Athletics gave their fans something to cherish for their loyal attendance of 19 innings?  If the Giants can give out the Croix de Candlestick, how about a Croix de Mount Davis for those Oakland fans?

If you are not familiar with Mount Davis, it's that structure in the top photo that blocks the view of the Oakland Hills skyline.  Some gave it the nickname "Mount Davis" because Al Davis moved the Raiders to Oakland and there was a need to add more seating; the top deck is so steep and tall that it's rare to find stadium seating that high anymore.

SF's District Attorney Gascon to Crackdown on Distracted Drivers - How About Distracted Pedestrians?

BMW driver caught making illegal left turn.

This morning, I was watching the local news and there was a brief news story about San Francisco's District Attorney, George Gascon to start a crackdown on distracted driving.  The news reporter said the reason behind it is San Francisco's higher than state average automobile vs. pedestrian accident rate.

I personally feel that a crackdown is necessary to stop people from shaving while driving, looking down at their cell phones while driving, and those who think eating a big burrito while driving is a smart idea.  There was one instance where traffic was held up for a few minutes because a lady was playing with her cell phone while traffic in front of her was moving forward.  When she noticed the cars moving and passing her, she advances forward, driving extremely slow, and enjoying whatever is on her cell phone.

But while the need to crackdown on distracted drivers is necessary, how about cracking down on distracted pedestrians?

Distracted pedestrians are just as dangerous as distracted drivers!

I'm a good driver and I don't have any distractions that keeps my eyes away from the road.  I always scan the road ahead of me, check my mirrors regularly, look for road hazards, identify drivers that are driving erratic, etc.  But pedestrians are even more risky because they could pull off some really stupid stuff.

Just yesterday on my drive back home, here's a list of unlawful things pedestrians did while distracted:

1. Jaywalk across six lanes of traffic and a median, including walking in front of my car without a care in the world.  The crosswalk was just 30 feet away from the person.  I gave the guy the stink eye.
2. Another pedestrian jaywalking 15 feet from a crosswalk on a busy four lane street while admiring the vase of flowers he had in his hands, and luckily the car that made a right turn was able to stop just in time to not hit the person.  The driver making the right turn could not see the pedestrian because the cars parked next to the curb made it a blind spot.  If the pedestrian crossed in the crosswalk, the driver would have easily seen him.
3. Talking with a friend and both decide to cross against a red hand pedestrian signal while cars with a priority green left turn arrow was turning.
4. Another instance of crossing against the red with incoming traffic.

Akit's Opinion
We all have a shared responsibility to obey the traffic laws of our city and state.  No matter if you ride a bicycle, drive a car, or walk, the laws in place is supposed to make sure you don't do something stupid and dangerous to risk your life or others.  Even with the laws, common sense should always be used, because sometimes people will do illegal things, and you need to make sure you can react quickly to prevent injury or death.

I personally feel that George Gascon needs to also tackle the problem with distracted pedestrians.  Wearing those $200 headphones while crossing the street isn't the smartest idea because it makes it difficult to hear if an oncoming car is approaching close.  But so isn't those rightious pedestrian dicks who think that it's totally okay to cross against a red signal and they won't get hit by a car.

Reality check pedestrians: You are not Superman.  In the battle between car vs. pedestrian, car will always win, and pedestrians will be in the hospital.

I'm just hoping the police will help by ticketing pedestrians that breaks the law; just like how Gascon will demand a crackdown on distracted drivers.

FasTrak and Clipper Card to Change Policy on Your Usage Records

Back in October 2012, a reporter from the Bay Citizen reported about an instance when a warrant was used to request data of a registered Clipper card user that was an alleged accomplice to a crime.

While it seems a great idea to link an accomplice to a crime by reviewing the data of a Clipper card user, it does raise the issue of privacy concerns and what information is kept by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and Clipper, and how long they keep information about your usage.

While the Bay Citizen reported the number of warrants to release information was only a few (back in October 2012), the data Clipper gathers is typically used for assessment purposes by reviewing the riding patterns of the public.  Without the need for people to have clipboards at bus stops, the Clipper card can keep track of the number of passengers that rides the vehicles, and at train stations and Golden Gate Transit, able to determine patterns of passengers of where they ride to and from.  The data they gather helps transit agencies find if additional or less service is needed, or the need to operate higher capacity vehicles or trains due to boarding numbers.

Some transit agencies like Samtrans and Muni may know what route you took, but can't determine where you boarded or exited because they don't have GPS information connected to the Clipper devices; this is unlike Golden Gate Transit that operates on a zone system requiring GPS to determine your ride fare, and train stations that needs to know what station you boarded and where you exited to properly charge you the right fare.

Even then, the data retained tells a lot about your usage patterns.  Is having a registered card risky?  If you are a criminal, probably so.  Grocery stores with self-checkouts sometimes have problem with theft by tricking the machines, but people are stupid enough to use their registered store loyalty card during the check-out process.  But if you are a law abiding citizen and don't mind having your records kept for several years, then it's okay for you.

The same concern is with FasTrak devices as well.  They know what time you crossed the bridge, but a privacy policy regarding the freeway devices keeping eye on traffic speeds don't record the FasTrak serial numbers, only to find out the speeds of the freeway to help aid the 511 website and the signs on the freeway with the estimated time of major exits and junctions.

After the Bay Citizen reported about the issue, the state government scrambled to work on changing the policy from seven years of data retention to just three.

However, a law that was proposed in the senate would re-define the retention of data for those who cancel their Clipper and FasTrak accounts; the policy would be only up to six months from the date of cancellation of the account.  Also, the senate law proposed would also: "Require deletion after six months of PII not needed "to perform account functions such as billing, account settlement, or enforcement activities.""
 
While six months sounds like a useful amount of time, the MTC did not agree on the six month policy because of the statute of limitations, so instead of six months or even three years, the most suitable amount of time would need to be longer.

Operations Committee of the MTC will be voting upon a proposal to change the retention of data this Friday:

• The MTC is proposing to change the data from seven years to four years and six months.

As stated in the MTC's document regarding the proposed change in policy: The statute of limitations can go up to four years.  By extending that with an extra six months, it allows the MTC and Clipper enough time to handle lawsuits and claims.

Akit's Opinion
Shortening it to just slightly beyond the statute of limitations isn't such a bad idea.  I'm not that concerned of my usage patterns, even with my grocery store loyalty cards.  Like Safeway really cares if I made a purchase of ice cubes and condoms in one transaction.

But if you personally have a fear of the government tracking you, why not just get an unregistered Clipper card?  Just make sure to replenish your card only using cash.

SF State/19th Avenue & Holloway Muni Metro Stop: Passengers Jumping from Platform

Would you dare to jaywalk across three lanes of traffic on one of San Francisco's busiest streets?

Let's take it up a notch, would you jump off a Muni metro platform and jaywalk across three lanes of traffic just so you don't miss your bus?

The fact is, this does happen.

View Larger Map

Take a look at the Google Maps image I've posted.  This is the metro platform stop for the M-Ocean View line at 19th Avenue and Holloway, in front of SF State.  You are looking at the east side (inbound) platform.

On some mornings, I notice passengers who just got off the inbound M-Ocean View line decide to jump off the platform and run across those three lanes of traffic just so they can take a shortcut to the bus stop that's on the sidewalk to catch the 17, 28, or 29 lines.  The first time I saw that, it was older Chinese women who was doing this, by risking their own life trying to make it across without getting hit by an incoming car.

While it's entirely possible to jump the platform and make it to the other side, the west (outbound) platform has a fence to prevent people from jumping, especially SF State students finding a cheap way to get across without walking down the ramp and using the crosswalk.  The city has installed fencing from Holloway to Winston to prevent jaywalking, especially at the track junction that was wildly popular and very illegal to get from one side of 19th to the SF State campus.  The city had to install the fencing because there have been some instances where people walking on the tracks was hit by a train or university police had to chase down someone on the active rail tracks.

It makes me wonder, why isn't there any fencing to prevent jumpers for the inbound side of the platform?  I wouldn't dare to attempt to jump from a platform and run across three lanes of traffic on the busiest and most dangerous road in San Francisco just to catch a bus.  I'd rather walk down the ramp and use the crosswalk, even if that meant missing the bus.  It's better for the city to prevent people getting mowed by a car than installing the barrier after the fact when someone's dead or in a coma.

Maybe I should text a tip to SFPD the next time I see it happen; never mind, since they don't read it in a timely manner.

SF Police's Text a Tip411 Slow to Respond & Not Monitored 24 Hours as Promised

If you heard the announcements on Muni about reporting graffiti with a simple text on your cell phone, nobody read your messages because the agency never received them; that is, until the SF Examiner exposed the problem.  But that was back in 2010 and hopefully the system works.

There's other anonymous text a tip lines out there like SFPD's:
The San Francisco Police Department has been touting their "Text a Tip" program where a person can text the department through a third party company, and they'll determine if its of a priority nature or forward it to a station or proper department for follow-up.

Read it for yourself:

"Through computers with Internet capability, SFPD Operations personnel will view all tips received 24/7 and evaluate each one. If the tip is of an emergency nature, personnel will forward it immediately to the Department of Emergency Management for officer dispatch. They will forward all other tips for assignment to the appropriate investigative bureau or district station. Investigative units will have an Internet-capable computer at their disposal and will be able to text back and forth with the tipster based on a randomly assigned ID number that the system, provided by Citizen Observer, Inc., supplies. The ID number is wholly confidential and is maintained in the company's server."

Simple enough.  Text them, and someone who monitors the system 24/7 will pass on the message.

I've tried it on a couple of occasions for some mild things like a person who was walking in the street drunk and someone suspicious walking on our block.  Although, I'd only get confirmation hours or even a day after, giving me a hint something doesn't seem right.

Something Smells Funny
That suspicion of it not being monitored all the time came to light in a recent text message conversation between me and whomever was "monitoring" the tip line when I made a request for a patrol officer to visit our block to scare off some recycling thieves:

So I read SFPD's website and it says I addressed an issue of concern and the backend person will decide if it needs to be addressed quickly or not, but since they or whomever third party company don't man the computer all the time, why do we spend our tax dollars on this?  Also, I frown on whomever responded saying: "I don't need to read it [the SFPD website]" as I referred to misleading information on their website.  If you want to be a dick, I'll blog about it.

I'm Not a Mind Reader

Now I know what some of you are thinking, if someone was having a heart attack or a serious crime was in progress, I'd call 911; but how about those that is a lower priority request, say you catch someone ripping down garage sale signs and littering them, or someone digging in everyone's trash can on your block every single week?  If SFPD's website tells me I can text them, they'll dispatch someone, and I remain anonymous, that's pretty nice; but if they don't monitor the messaging system all the time, what's the point of having it at all or why poorly advertise it?

After Waiting for More Than a Month - Donation Bins Finally GONE

It's finally GONE!  Took you long enough.

After an entire month of waiting and some heavy handed persistence to the city government to do something, the donation bins blocking public a parking space and meter have finally been moved away.

Initially when I reported on the bins at the corner of Evelyn and Portola, I got a surly response from San Francisco 311 that they want me to call the donation bin company for blocking a city parking space, therefore the SFMTA makes zero revenue on the parking meter.  After giving the 311 folks a kick in the shin, they forward my request to DPW to get the ball rolling.

Three weeks after my initial request, the bins still remained and the city "escalated" the issue because it was taking too long for the task to be completed.  The city contacted the company on February 11th and demanded for them to remove the bins.

Sometime within the last seven days, the bins finally departed.  I know for sure they were still there on March 2nd because I always pick-up some lotto tickets at the market on the corner.

I'm happy that the city took action to get the donation bin company to move their bins off of public property because on some weekends, the lot can get full, and the city doesn't make any revenue on the parking meter.  But I'm very disappointed at the long wait because DPW should have moved it themselves after giving a week's notice and send the bill to the donation bin company.  Those donation bin companies knows they are NOT supposed to put those on public property and should only be on private property with the permission of the land owner.

Muni Should Seriously Question How They Spend Their Money

Photo from Flickr user "Nathan Y" using a Creative Commons License

Just a week ago, it was the first day for San Francisco's youth to use their free Muni passes for sixteen months.  Sure, it was a joyous occasion for city politicians, advocates for youth, and the kids that qualified for the program, but has angered many (including yours truly) that it's a huge waste of millions of taxpayer dollars.

My primary argument: The city and Muni should be spending the several million dollars that is now being used for free rides, and actually using it towards preventative maintenance and maintaining critical systems.

So just the day before the release of the new passes for kids, something big came up, a Muni metro's passenger door fell off on the journey between Castro and Church station.  Muni metro vehicle 1439's front door fell onto the trackway, and while passengers were not injured, it sure points out the need for money for maintenance on the agency's aging fleet.

(Note: Photo used in this blog entry not the actual one of the incident)

I think all that money Muni is spending on free passes for kids is one big joke.  If a person got killed from that incident by flying out of that train, the city would be spending a huge amount of dough inspecting every single door.  But with an agency still bleeding red, how can they spend money on youth when it should be invested in prevention and repairs?  If another transformer blew in the metro system, there would be another metro meltdown because no trains can operate without electricity; I'd rather see the millions spent to maintain and possibly upgrade the transformers so it can help everybody, and not just kids getting a free ride.

As I mentioned before: Kids, you should be very fortunate that Muni gives the best discounts out of the rest of the agencies in the Bay Area.  You get a 62.5% discount (versus adult fare) with a free transfer, other agencies don't give free transfers or cut the discount to 50% or less.

There's no way to cancel the pass program, but I'm hoping the city will realize after the pilot program ends, that it's NEVER RENEWED.  Too damn expensive.