1. There are 10 sections to this questionnaire. Each section
corresponds with the 10 Key Values of the Green Party.
2. Most sections begin with a written question and ends with several
3. The multiple-choice questions are answered by checking the box in the
appropriate column to indicate which is closest to your position:
+ = Support / Agree / Yes
- = Oppose / Disagree / No
: = Undecided / Don't know / No opinion
4. The world is too complex to always break down neatly into
yes/no/maybe choices, so feel free to clarify any answers to multiple
choice questions with a few words.
Candidate Name: Tom Radulovich
Phone Number: 415 344-0489 (office)
Web site: www.tomradulovich.com
Name of Campaign Manager:
Major Endorsements: Sierra Club, San Francisco League of Conservation Voters, Democratic Party, Alice B. Toklas LGBT Club, Supervisor Avalos, Senator Leno (partial list).
Favorite Incumbent Board Member: Besides myself? Robert Raburn has been a great addition to our board
Least favorite: Director Fang is the hardest to work with.
1) Grassroots Democracy: What are your thoughts on Instant Runoff Voting, and District Elections? How have they worked to date? What would you change in the future?
I think Instant Runoff Voting and District Elections are working well, and I can't think of much I would change about them, except perhaps to allow voters to rank more than 3 choices.
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ x ] More transit agencies should have elected boards of directors.
[ x ] [ ] [ ] In the absence of elected transit boards, more transit boards should at least be subject to a split appointment process
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Create a system of public financing for all elected officeholders, including elected transit agency directors
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Create limits on campaign contributions to members of elected transit agency boards
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Regulate contributions to officials who are elected to regional boards
[ 1 ] [ ] [ ] My campaign accepts corporate contributions
[ 1 ] [ ] [ ] My campaign accepts contributions from paid lobbyists or related entities having any interest in City and County of San Francisco or beyond
1. I am adhering to BART's voluntary limit on taking funds from any entities with pending contracts before the BART board, or who were awarded contracts recently.
2) Ecological Wisdom: Please outline your view of the major environmental and ecological issues facing San Francisco and your proposed policies to address them.
San Francisco, and the planet, face numerous and urgent ecological challenges - climate change, peak oil, resource depletion, biodiversity, toxins in the air, water, and soil, an unsustainable and unhealthy food system, and environmental justice challenges. Lessening automobile dependence, and fostering compact, walkable, bicycle-friendly, and affordable communities well-served by public transportation address multiple ecological challenges, and help foster creative, diverse, convivial, engaged, and inclusive human communities that further our personal well-being and development. I am fortunate to serve as a BART Director, and Livable City Executive Director so I can spend my days working to address these challenges and promote such human communities.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Reducing greenhouse gas emissions from the transportation sector
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Reducing or eliminating parking minimums in new housing and commercial developments
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Congestion tolls on Doyle Drive
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Livermore BART extension
[ ] [ 1 ] [ ] DMU eBART to Antioch
[ ] [ 2 ] [ ] Rail Around the Bay BART extensions to Warm Springs, San Jose, and Santa Clara
1. I could support an EMU service to Eastern Contra Costa County if it were on the existing rail line rather in the freeway median, not coupled with a freeway widening project, had better TOD prospects, and didn't extend past Antioch. DMU service is cheaper to build, but keeps us dependent on fossil fuels and will be increasingly costly to operate as peak oil and policies to address climate change kick in.
2. I grudgingly accept BART's extension to Milpitas, where it makes an important connection Santa Clara County's light rail network, but not farther. The rail loop around the bay should be completed by upgrading Caltrain, the Capitols, and future Dumbarton rail service to an electrified regional metro service.
3) Social Justice:
A) Did you take a public position on the Oakland Airport Connector? Please explain.
I opposed the project because of its high cost, poor performance, a financing plan which raided BART's operating funds, and the project's dependence on huge and unsustainable increases in air travel over the next 30 years.
B) What are your views on Transit-Oriented Development and efforts to create affordable housing? How do you see peak oil impacting your votes on the BART Board of Directors?
I have supported transit-oriented development and affordable housing since coming to the board of directors. We have a lot of work to do to make TOD successful and affordable. Despite some progress, TOD at BART is hampered by local land use policies, including high parking requirements and a bias in many cities against rental housing, and on BART or local officlals' insistence on replacing commuter parking around stations. BART needs to be a more energetic advocate for walkable, mixed-use, diverse, and affordable communities around our stations. Fortunately our new General Manager wholeheartedly agrees, and I am working with her to make BART planning more strategic and forward looking in this regard. I also worked on statewide transit village legislation that mirrors Redevelopment requirements for affordability, and can help communities replace redevelopment's affordable housing funding. The good news is that we are seeing a major culture shift towards urban, or at least walkable communities, less auto dependence, and sustainability, so
I started reading about Peak Oil in 2003, and it influences all my decision making. We don't know when the peak will be reached or its full social and economic effects, but all of our policy decisions should be peak oil aware, and work well in a near-term peak oil scenario.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] BART directors should focus on maintaining the existing system as opposed to building extensions to suburbs.
4) Nonviolence: What are your solutions for improving the accountability of the BART police force while making the system safer? Do you think the BART police force should exist? Do you think BART police officers should carry guns and/or tasers?
In 2010 BART secured the necessary changes to state law to create a Citizen Review Board and Independent Police Auditor's office. They were created for three purposes: to receive and investigate complaints of police misconduct, and recommend disciplinary measures; to recommend changes to BART police policies and practices, and to serve as a sounding board for community concerns about BART policing. This system has only been fully up and running for a year.
We also commissioned two outside audits of BART policing, which looked comprehensively at policies, procedures, management, and training. Our new police chief has created a work program from these recommendations, and reports regularly to the Board of Directors' Police Review Committee, which I sit on, and to the CRB on the department's progress. One of the initiatives is to greatly expand police training beyond what is required for California peace officers, with an emphasis on diversity training, de-escalation, and mental health. Another initiative has been to move to a community policing model for BART police.
These are the right directions for BART policing – strong independent oversight, creating a forum for community concerns about policing, and outside assessments of BART policing. I do think BART should continue to have its own police force; we cover four counties, and several dozen cities, and contracting with local police forces for policing of individual stations would create a morass of accountability, effectiveness, and responsiveness to community needs. I continue to have reservations about guns and tasers, but I doubt that BART will be the first police force to do away with them entirely.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Creation of a BART police force citizen oversight committee
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Create an office of the Independent Police Auditor for the BART police
5) Decentralization: In general, the Green Party supports the principal of decentralization. What is your proposal for making our Bay Area transit agencies at once decentralized and at the same time efficient, affordable, and appealing?
This is a question where the principles of subsidiarity and proportionality are helpful. I think we need better (and more transparent, accountable, and equitable) planning at a regional level for the regional-scale transportation network, and stronger regional commitment to ensuring access to jobs and housing. I chaired BART's regional rail committee, which worked with the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and other stakeholders to develop a 40-year strategy for an integrated regional rail network. I want to continue that work in my next term. In the current, multi-agency setup, we need to coordinate our capital investments, schedules, fares, etc. This can be done by closer coordination of multiple agencies, or by consolidation. Coordination, or the 'transit federation' model, works well in many other urban regions, where separate agencies coordinate and integrate their services seamlessly around the needs of transit riders. The BART-Muni Fast Pass is an example of such coordination; riders can buy a single pass that allows use of both systems interchangeably, and BART and Muni agree to a formula for sharing the revenue. There are various routes to consolidation as well. One option is to keep separate policy boards, but to increase efficiency by allowing one agency do most of the management - BART, for example, has very successfully managed the Capitol Corridor trains, but it has a separate policy board, and service is contracted to Amtrak. We can also start getting policy boards to interlock - BART directors on the Caltrain board, for example, in the way BART directors sit on the Capitol Corridor Board. I personally think an elected, regional transit agency makes sense, but we may get there in incremental steps.
Since I have been on the BART board, I have watched BART begin to think and grow beyond dependence on a single, proprietary rail technology - managing the Capitol Corridor, proposing DMU service in Eastern Contra Costa County, and even the Oakland Airport Connector. This is the right direction for BART and the region, and I hope we continue to grow regional metro, express bus, light rail, and other options into a seamless regional network that also fits the needs of particular corridors and communities, and enables us to increase service incrementally as resources permit.
There are good reasons why it makes sense to manage local transit services locally, so long as such services are well integrated with long-haul regional services. This can be accomplished by maintaining separate agencies in a transit federation, or by giving local operators some degree of autonomy within a larger organization - the way that New York City Transit, Long Island Railroad, Metro North Railroad, and Long Island bus have some autonomy within New York's MTA is an example.
I think strict 'return to source' funding requirements create problems. Every community should receive fair and effective transit service in return for what they pay in. But dubious return-to-source arguments have provided the fuel for moves to provide expensive BART service to communities whose land use patterns don't support heavy rail service, like the proposed BART extension to Livermore Airport. Ineffective projects like this one can overtap resources and weaken the entire system. It's important to be mindful that public transit is an interconnected, interdependent network; investing funds where you sleep, rather than where you work, or the route in between, may not do you the most good. For example, most Contra Costa residents who ride BART are headed to downtown San Francisco, so maintenance, access, and capacity investments in Downtown stations should be shared among riders and taxpayers from all BART counties, not just San Francisco. Geographic equity is one important consideration, but other planning imperatives - maintaining universal standards, cost-effectivness, and social and environmental justice, including Title VI of the Civil Rights Act - are important considerations as well.
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Create one regional, elected transit agency
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Create a system whereby a portion of sales and property taxes assessed by transit districts must be spent in those transit districts
6) Community Based Economics: What economic policies, including taxation, land use from the Planning Department, and investment from the Redevelopment Agency would you propose that would drive capital into our communities and keep that capital here for residents?
I think that growth should pay for growth - meaning that new development should fund the necessary improvements in sustainable transportation infrastructure to accommodate the new riders (and walkers and cyclists) while maintaining service for existing riders. A think development impact fees in San Francisco and elsewhere in the region can do that. Similarly, development should not externalize the impacts of development onto neighbors - increased traffic or pollution from development, for example, should be avoided altogether, or effectively mitigated. Large projects should bring greater public benefits, including affordable housing, public open space, and sustainable transportation infrastructure that fosters walking, cycling, and transit.
Other strategies for community reinvestment includes allowing BART workers to do more work that is presently contracted out, and expanding the participation of small, local, and minority- and women-owned businesses in contracted out work. I think BART's project labor agreement policy, which requires that all large construction projects have project labor agreements, is a progressive reform which promotes a living wage and a commitment to job training and recruitment in local communities. Improving BART's commitment to good design and public art in its facilities will encourage transit use, support local artists and designers, and strengthen civic culture, community identity, and personal enjoyment.
Strengthening BART's focus on core-system reinvestment, including maintenance and green rehabilitation, capacity improvements, access improvements, community amenities like community facilities and public open spaces, and transit-oriented office, retail, and housing projects, will create jobs, foster community reinvestment, and improve community livability. As I mentioned above, the Transit Village Planning Act will allow tax-increment financing of affordable housing and community infrastructure in transit-centered neighborhoods.
+ - ?
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Local hiring requirements should be enforced
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Downtown transit assessment fee
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Citywide transit assessment fee
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Prop 13 limits on tax increases should apply only to residential properties
7) Feminism: Women continue to be underrepresented in government. Why do you believe this is the case? Is this a bad thing, and if so, what would you do to remedy this?
I don't know the reasons why. Women are advancing rapidly in most other professions, so I hope that there will soon be greater parity in political offices as well - and the sooner the better. I think we all have an obligation to seek out and support women leaders for elected and , and to consciously foster opportunities for women in political and public policy organizations. Promoting civil and compassionate political discourse, and fostering healthier work-life balance in politics, will make government more appealing for many women - and for many men as well.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] The City should help provide more quality childcare to working parents
8) Respect for Diversity: Do you think the significant money lost in civil case suits like Oscar Grant's and others jeopardize the relationship between unions and management to impose/draw up any present/future union-management agreements or contracts?
As far as I can tell, civil suits are not a factor in union-management relations at BART.
+ - ?
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Non-citizen residents should be able to vote in all local elections
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Full rights for transgender persons
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Boards and commissions now reflect the ethnic diversity of San Francisco
[ ] [ ] [ x ] Boards and commissions now reflect the political diversity of San Francisco
[ ] [ ] [ x ] My campaign reflects the diversity of San Francisco
9) Global and Personal Responsibility: Explain the connection between your own campaign and your views on global and personal responsibility.
Being on the BART board affords me the opportunity to engage and foster values like social justice, sustainability, and public engagement at a regional, citywide, and neighborhood scale. I hope BART can not only serve the Bay Area well, but can serve as a leader and innovator for other transit agencies.
10) Sustainability: What does the Transit First City Charter provision mean to you? How has Transit First fared in recent years, and how would you enforce that Charter Provision if elected?
Transit First, in the broader sense in which it appears in the City Charter (prioritizing transit, walking, and cycling before private autos in the use of city streets) makes sense from the standpoint of sustainability, social justice and equity, livability, and universal design. It was first enacted legislatively in 1973, and has since been affirmed in various charter amendments and other policies of the city. It is a principle we haven't yet fully lived up to. We are still, to a great extent, living with the mid-century project of promoting the primacy and universality of the private auto. BART has been a large part of delivering on transit first - it's no accident that it was first enacted the year BART opened (also the year of the OPEC oil embargo), and BART has steadily increased the absolute number and percentage of transit trips within and to-and-from San Francisco. We can further transit first by expanding our capacity to carry more riders, by better coordinating and integrating BART and Muni service, by increasing access to our system for pedestrians, cyclists, and people with disabilities, by fostering dense, walkable neighborhoods and new jobs and housing around BART stations, and reducing BART's dependence on drive-alone commuting by reducing subsidies for station parking and enhancing sustainable access modes.
+ - ?
[ ] [ ] [ 1 ] MUNI should be funded greater levels and be free to the rider
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Higher residential construction along neighborhood transit corridors, which may include raising height limits by two to three stories.
[ ] [ ] [ 2 ] Diversion of money set aside for seismic retrofit projects into a solar energy incentives program
[ x ] [ ] [ ] State law change that lets bicycles treat stop signs as yield signs and red lights as stop signs
[ x ] [ ] [ ] I ride MUNI, bicycle and/or walk instead of driving on a regular basis
[ ] [ ] [ 3 ] Bus Rapid Transit on Geary
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Allow residents to park on the sidewalk without getting a ticket, unless their neighbors complain
[ x ] [ ] [ ] I agree with the recommendations in the Peak OilTask Force Report
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Congestion pricing for parking
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Power more City vehicles using corn-based ethanol
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Residents should be allowed to park in the street in front of their own driveway for free
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Oppose expanding parking meter hours to include later evening hours and weekends
[ x ] [ ] [ ] Remove parking spots and car lanes to create dedicated bike and bus lanes or wider sidewalks
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Building BART extensions by borrowing from funds set aside for future seismic upgrades
[ ] [ x ] [ ] Using unexpected financial windfall for a rollback of BART fares
1.Muni should be funded at higher levels, and available funding should be directed to projects which deliver more direct rider benefit. We should in any case ensure that Muni remains affordable for low-income riders. We ought to understand what causes people not to use Muni; is it the cost, or is it factors like safety, reliability, or accessibility? if for most riders it is the latter, then funds should go towards improving those elements of the service rather than making it free.
2.We have an enormous need for seismic retrofit work in the city; rather than divert those funds, we should figure out an other way to fund solar energy projects.
3.I prefer light rail to bus rapid transit on Geary Boulevard.