Photo by Flickr user ecastro
Is Muni’s proposed service reduction legal? That’s the topic of discussion at Tuesday’s Board of Supervisors meeting, the Examiner reports.
Transit activist David Pilpel filed an appeal with the Board of Supervisors saying the cuts, which save about $29 million, violate the California Environmental Quality Act guidelines, according to KCBS.
In a nutshell, Pilpel’s appeal says that the SFMTA should have conducted a state-mandated environmental review of the proposed 10 percent service cuts. Meanwhile, the MTA says that they don’t need to because they’ve declared a fiscal emergency. We’ll keep you updated.
If you liked this Muni diary, you might like:
Written by eugenia
Like Sex, Love, Lust … Muni? Click 
Ride Muni like a boss. Our Fast Pass Clipper card holders and Muni Diaries T-shirts are all on sale 
Getting around the mandatory EIR was the whole reason they declared a fiscal emergency, no?
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]
Mikesonn Reply:
April 12th, 2010 at 2:26 pm
Yeah, pretty much. But I think the argument is that the 10% cuts are way above and beyond anything that was discussed as a possible outcome of the fiscal emergency.
Also, in my opinion, it isn’t a fiscal emergency when you make no effort to find funding sources and depend solely on cuts and fare hikes to balance a budget.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
[Reply]