3 ms·

Right now we already have a patchwork of ad-hoc, incomplete metro level quasi government bodies in the Bay Area, the big ones being BART and the various other t

Right now we already have a patchwork of ad-hoc, incomplete metro level quasi government bodies in the Bay Area, the big ones being BART and the various other transport agencies. London reinstated metro level governance 20 years ago and transport is the bulk of its responsibility. It's hard to imagine improvements like the congestion charge and low emissions zone moving forward without that democratic mandate.

vlovich123 3y ago
Yeah. So have the state unify it all into a single transit authority. That doesn’t convince me about unifying all facets of government. For example, one thing called out is policing. But the claimed problem of interop between departments feels superficial. It’s not like communication is prohibited and you’d still have jurisdictional precinct issues. The problems with policing are intrinsic with how it’s set up structurally in terms of unions, insurance, enforcement of rules within police etc. that doesn’t get better when you amalgamate. Indeed, Toronto’s police famously turned out to have an agreement after amalgamation (iirc) that they struck with gangs to avoid enforcement / prosecution as long as violence was kept in check. When that kind of stuff happens, it’s impact is much narrower when you have independently run departments.
- laurencerowe 3y ago
  It's possible to have multiple levels. Most places in California have both City and County levels of government. San Francisco is weird in that it is a combined City and County. The logical outcome would seemingly be to have one metropolitan county covering the whole Bay Area with responsibility for transport and other shared concerns then have the various cities (which are effectively boroughs) underneath that. Who knows, maybe they could organise integrated fares across the patchwork of different transport systems!

vlovich123 3y ago

Yeah. So have the state unify it all into a single transit authority. That doesn’t convince me about unifying all facets of government. For example, one thing called out is policing. But the claimed problem of interop between departments feels superficial. It’s not like communication is prohibited and you’d still have jurisdictional precinct issues. The problems with policing are intrinsic with how it’s set up structurally in terms of unions, insurance, enforcement of rules within police etc. that doesn’t get better when you amalgamate. Indeed, Toronto’s police famously turned out to have an agreement after amalgamation (iirc) that they struck with gangs to avoid enforcement / prosecution as long as violence was kept in check. When that kind of stuff happens, it’s impact is much narrower when you have independently run departments.

laurencerowe 3y ago
It's possible to have multiple levels. Most places in California have both City and County levels of government. San Francisco is weird in that it is a combined City and County. The logical outcome would seemingly be to have one metropolitan county covering the whole Bay Area with responsibility for transport and other shared concerns then have the various cities (which are effectively boroughs) underneath that. Who knows, maybe they could organise integrated fares across the patchwork of different transport systems!