Rahm Emanuel: C/D? (probably going to be a Chicago politics complaint thread too)

It needs reforming and it certainly deserves to be scrutinized because of all the corruption. But I'm biased and 100% ok with it being purely revenue generating. I'd put one at every stop light in the city if I could.

It irritates me when every article that criticizes the safety claims links to that same flawed tribune investigation that looked at the raw number of crashes rather than the severity of the injuries as the result of t-bone crashes vs rear end collisions.

Having to cross a 6-way intersection every day makes me kind of crabby about the whole thing.

i've seen more people sail through red lights in the last 4 months than i have in my entire memory -- like at least 6 or 7
not like sneak through at the last sec during the yellow (that's normal) -- i mean didn't slow down at all after looking to see if anyone was coming from the other directions sailed right through

sure those people are assholes but it makes me worried about the general breakdown of polite society when people stop obeying traffic signals
it's like just generally a bad sign

Yeah that's my take too -- if someone wantonly flies through, uncaring who they might hurt/kill in the process, you think they give a shit about a $200 fine enough to change their behavior? People drive drunk, without licenses and/or insurance and all the regulation in the world doesn't stop them. That's why I don't like the things: their inception was corrupt to begin with, they ticket innocents, and since they can't motivate better behavior they're just a revenue generator, not a safety enhancement.

I say this as a daily bike commuter (only one day off this winter so far) who consistently sees new and innovative shitty road behavior almost every day. (But I run stop signs and lights too, if no one's coming.)

But as I mentioned, contrary to the Tribune's reporting, they have been shown to reduce the severity of crashes, even if the actual number of rear end collisions increase. FHWA study: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/publications/research/safety/05049/

I wonder if there's anything to show that the cameras have been placed at intersections with a high likelihood of right angle crashes as well as the other factors recommended in the conclusions.

Related: Garcia updated his transportation platform to actually mention bikes and pedestrians. When he originally released it last Monday, there was no mention at all. Looks like he got some backlash from that and tacked a paragraph onto the end. http://www.chicagoforchuy.com/issues/safe-and-reliable-transportation

xpost. That would be the compromise. I think it would also make sense to increase the yellow light time at intersections that need it too. It's kind of crazy that the same 3 second standard is used regardless of the distance that needs to be covered in the intersection. But I'm not sure that there can be variable yellow light times in the system, it's an all or nothing setting, if I recall correctly reading somewhere.

A camera every red light is just my little retribution dream. Totally unrealistic, but it would make me feel so good when I almost become a hood ornament that the asshole that did it would be $100 poorer.

I voted for Chuy, and I'll do it again, but I can't imagine how a vote for either of them would affect my life in any meaningful way. Thinking about other Chicagoans.

that's what voting is about -- good for everyone, not just you!

We're all pedestrians.

Guess I'm not very civic-minded.

Now HERE'S a transportation issue I can get behind!

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/breaking/redeye-bridgeport-activists-call-for-31st-street-bus-20150302-story.html

Two positive Garcia articles:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/03/03/the-rahm-slayer.html
http://www.salon.com/2015/03/04/rahm_emanuels_political_nightmare_jesus_chuy_garcia_tells_salon_why_hell_oust_the_mayor/

Also, I don't know who this woman is, but she goes off on Willie Wilson:

http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/Felsenthal-Files/March-2015/Hermene-Hartman/

some of garcia's answers strike me as a little weasely (sp?) but nobody said he wasn't a politician. he's certainly no visionary, but he seems like a reasonably honest guy with many of the right instincts, which puts him several miles ahead of rahm.

Sort of how I look at it too.

I hope he comes around on a lot of issues where his primary stance is "not Rahm", the transportation issues in particular. Probably one of the best things Rahm did was the Complete Streets Design Guidelines and pursuing a Vision Zero initiative. Unlikely Garcia will take as bold of a stance until after the elections to keep the votes of the cranky drivers and NIMBY's that would oppose such initiatives.

yeah, rahm has done some good things as much as I'm loathe to admit it. i agree that Garcia would be wise to acknowledge them, while still hammering the point about Mayor 1% (which is completely true). it would make him seem like the adult in the room.

Garcia really pandering hard to the anti-RLC crowed on twitter today. Says that the cameras will come down on day one of his administration because he has seen new evidence that they have nothing to do with safety. New evidence that he fails to cite.

yikes

will that secret detention facility come up in the election? in the debate? will there even be a debate?

Three debates:
March 16, sponsored by NBC-5 and Telemundo in conjunction with the University of Chicago’s Institute of Politics and the Harris School of Public Policy.
March 31, on the WTTW-TV Channel 11 program, “Chicago Tonight.”
A date to be determined on WFLD-TV Fox 32.

Meanwhile, not much local reporting on the detention facility:
http://www.cjr.org/united_states_project/guardian_homan_square_chicago_media.php

https://preaprez.wordpress.com/2015/03/05/rahm-screams-at-mental-health-activists-youre-gonna-respect-me/

Ugh.

i have no doubt that rahm is an arrogant, bullying shitheel, but fred klonsky is kind of a professional cranky/shit-stirrer and i'd take his account of things with a grain of salt (or two).

crank, i mean

Another Not Rahm policy from Garcia, wants to shorten the school day that Rahm lengthened.

I don't have a strong opinion on this since I do not have a school aged child at this time. I'm sure I will 3 years from now.

Someone tell me the positives and negatives for kids/parents/teachers.

I know there's a lot of info out there about how a later start is much better for kids (which I am obviously all for) but I don't know about a longer school day.

teachers go home and grade/plan stuff for hours after school, so it's not like they're working 8-hour days anyway. adding to the school day seems kind of over the top to me.

http://www.wbez.org/page/education-question-4

Interesting that most of the candidates in the last election were for the longer school day. Except for CMB, who is vague as hell about it.

Obviously Garcia, who is backed by CTU, is going to have a different opinion.

A very cursory websearch suggests that IL elementary school kids have the shortest school day in the nation (5.something hours) and that is not enough for a "rich curriculum."

something something stop teaching to standardized testing eyeroll something something

i would agree w/ getting the illinois school day in line w/ other states

Garcia's red light camera angle must be working, Rahm announcing "reforms".

I'm so turned off by both candidates at this point. I just need to stop paying attention until they move on to another issue. What's next? O'Hare noise?

Property tax, I guess. Doesn't directly effect me, unless it grumps out my landlord enough to raise the rent. Whatever, got to pay for these pensions somehow.

Read today that it's only 20k per Chicago resident to fix the pension crisis. We can do this! I'll set up a gofundme.

Everyone should just take the year off and donate their salary to the city. We can spend the time filling potholes pro bono.

I'd prefer to repaint crosswalks. If I can get subsidized childcare and an interest-free suspension of my student loans, I'd consider it. I could use some time off.

Bummed today about the two new people Rauner is putting on the CTA board. Neither with any sort of transit job experience or even advocacy.

Oh great. We definitely need more people who have no idea what riding public transit is like to make major decisions regarding public transportation.

I agree, it's insane, but I'm expecting nothing but absolutely terrible moves from Rauner from here on out.

They'll fit right in with Forrest Claypool.

They don't want ppl w experience -- they want hawks :(

Rauner makes me feel so hopeless and depressed.

Me too

Me three

I guess it's possible these people could do a good job without any specific experience, Huberman didn't have any and he did good as CTA prez. But they are coming from Rauner.... so skepticism is warranted.

rauner is like walker in that he favors putting people on the boards of public assets that have open hostility for those assets

call it the margaret thatcher approach

Hey, we've tried it with people who cared. Let's give someone that does not give a fuck a chance. What's the worst that can happen?

BTW, that Senate Bill 1 is like the sword of Damocles hanging over every city, town, village and municipality. Everyone should call their rep and make sure that shit gets shut down

is there a link to an article that explains it well?