Comments so far on this story:

1. Theresa Quiroz wrote on April 30, 2008 12:51 PM:
"A closer look at the RTP shows that the money will be spent on transit facilities - bus stops, trolley stations, BRT lanes. But it takes operating funds to run a transit system, and right now the operating funds available are plummeting. MTS is currently dealing with a more than $6 million deficit. We can have a great transit system, but only when this issue of the availability of recurring operating funds is dealt with. And that is the role of SANDAG whose Transportation Committee says that polling shows that the people don't want transit. So we can look forward to much, much more congestion."

2. Never Rode the Bus wrote on April 30, 2008 1:10 PM:
"What are they smoking over at Sandag? Sandag HOPES public transit ridership will increase. Sandag WISHES. ( I understand: I hope Barack Obama will be President and I wish Hillary would go away.) In 38 years here, and living close to a bus stop, I have never ridden the bus. Maybe in my old age. Maybe when gas goes to $5/gallon. Maybe when pigs fly, I will too."

3. John E wrote on April 30, 2008 1:40 PM:
"Juxtapose this question with NCTD's planned Draconian service reductions -- see "rider alerts" under gonctd.com. One asinine plan, fortunately aborted, would have truncated route 101 service at Del Mar, completely severing NCTD bus service from MTS bus service. There is no way transit ridership can double if service, even along highly successful and popular routes such as the 101, is cut."

4. Watcher wrote on April 30, 2008 1:53 PM:
"San Diego built its original trolley line on the cheap using abandoned or underused freight train rail line and never tried to use transit to connect regional employment and housing centers. Unless SANDAG begins building new transit lines(trolley, sprinter or BRT) line that get people from there they live to where they work and back at nearly the same speeds they can commute in their cars, SANDAG's projected increase in transit use it probably another bureaucratic fantasy. SANDAG has traditionally focused on just building more freeway lanes to subsidize sprawl development, and now is planning on charging us all more to use them."

5. Howiek wrote on April 30, 2008 2:44 PM:
"I have to agree with the Watcher here. The trolley system was built on the cheap and has no real possibility of improving—you call riding the trolley for an hour versus driving a car for 10 or 15 minutes to get where you need to go efficient? What a load of crap. Until transportation takes into account the fact that it just doesn’t go where people work and live, it will never provide a relief! Or are we just supposed to live where SANDAG has decided for us to live?"

6. William Lekas wrote on April 30, 2008 2:58 PM:
"I drive in from Ramona. At the time I come in there is not really alot of traffic on the road but almost $4.00/gal is way out of hand! Just as a test, I started riding on the trolley from Santee which illiminates 1/3 of my trip and if I could ride in from Ramona or Poway, I would not use my car at all. The long and the short of it is that the sustainability issue of transportation is that cars emit. We talk about reducing emmissions and our cars are probably 30% of the problem. We have to change our habits! One thing that has to happen to facilitate this change is better mass transit with quicker transit time. The next area that needs a trolley(s) is the I15 corridor with both local stops and express"

7. NorthCountyBusiness wrote on April 30, 2008 3:06 PM:
"The one employee who uses the sprinter who works for us needs to bring his bicycle in order to get to work on time! The issue with public transit here in San Diego is the distance between the depots and where you want to go. Unless this situation changes PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION WILL FAIL IN ALL RURAL AREAS OF THE COUNTY! PLUG- IN RENTABLE ELECTRIC VEHICLES ARE NEEDED AT ALL TRAIN/TROLLEY DEPOTS. THE BUS IS TOO CUMBERSOME TO USE."

8. PopnStabilizer wrote on April 30, 2008 3:31 PM:
"Answer will be completely determined by whether a short-lease can be put on the pro-high growth lobby (SanDAG, US Congress, chamber of commerce, building industry, open borders advocates, Sierra Club, etc.) .................... Illegal immigration is accelerating; illegal aliens make heavy use of public transportation throughout county. Will they - and future illegal immigrants - be given amnesty? ...................W will Congress do about legal immigration? In May 2006 the US Senate - with the support of Obama, Clinton, and McCain - passed Senate Bill 2611 (it was not passed by the House, fortunately). That bill would have tripled legal immigration rates and increased US popn growth rate from about 1%/year to 2%/year. Guess what our next president will be trying to do.....again. Is SanDAG taking that into account?? .................... When will SanDAG become a REAL planning agency and not just a accomodationist agency?"

9. Never Rode the Bus wrote on April 30, 2008 3:49 PM:
"Holy hannah, no matter the subject, we segue to "illegal aliens!" Is there such a thing as amnesty for this topic? First of all, "Stabilizer," it's "short leash" -- not lease. Is English your first language? Second, the Sierra Club is NOT a "pro-high growth lobby:" where did you get that idea? The Sierra Club even has a radical zero population growth wing lurking inside its green organization. Finally, it is true that poor working people, some of whom appear to be Latino, do use the cumbersome, expensive and inadequate system of public transit we sort of have. So far, no citizenship checks occur on MTS and, should Big Brother ever be permitted to question riders, that will be just another compelling reason for me to stay off the bus."

10. Simple Guy wrote on April 30, 2008 4:05 PM:
"California should put a $5/gallon tax on gas and use it to fund transit. Gas is going to be $10/gallon soon anyway...the supply of oil is diminishing while the demand in China and India is growing. Better to tax it now, fund our infrastructure and transit operations, and start to change behavior. Like the mechanic from the old Fram Oil Filter ad said, 'you can pay me now, or you can pay me later.' Paying now is going to be painful, but a lot less painful than ignoring the problem and paying later. Too bad there are no politicians with the political will and leadership ability to bring our city, state or country along where we need to go. Instead we get pander-bears like Steve Francis and Hillary Clinton, telling us what their polls say we want to hear."

11. Wide Awake wrote on April 30, 2008 4:20 PM:
"Watcher & Lekas-correct, but as long as the infrastructure, ie. raised ramps, etc. in MV are in, according to a German engineer, "any kind of transit can be used." Most important is "to connect regional employment and housing centers"..to "get people (RT) from there they live & work," at close to or better than commuting time, "SANDAG's projected increase in transit use it probably another bureaucratic fantasy." Lekas' "driv(ing) in from Ramona," is typical of road weary drivers, who will change if given a REAL, viable option. "..next area that needs a trolley(s) is the I15 corridor with both local stops and express" are smart comments taken from those who lived in great towns with great transportation systems..that bring stability into any city's economic budget. SD, get off your rear & put in a real Airport that can be a hub for our new FAA funded Transportation System!"

12. jack wrote on April 30, 2008 4:52 PM:
"The most effective way to reroute our transportation system to one that is sustainable is to take one lane OFF every freeway! If we keep paving the face of San Diego County, they will come! Sandag is on the road to creating a BAD version of Los Angeles. Time to stop this nonsense and create a world for our grandchildren we will be proud of!"

13. Howiek wrote on May 1, 2008 3:37 AM:
"Wide Awake said, “SD, get off your rear & put in a real Airport that can be a hub for our new FAA funded Transportation System!". Careful, you thinking too much! Your thinking is a bit too advanced for many “mired in the 50’s thinking” San Diegans."

14. Jack Griffiths wrote on May 1, 2008 5:21 AM:
"In justification for the Sunrise PowerLink SDG-E estimates the growth of this region in the next ten years at 1.3 million new residents. Either SANDAG,like many others, is skeptical of the Utility's research or they are indeed smoking something.SANDAG's report defies logic. As I've share before on this topic the American psyche finds buses, etc an anathema to its concept of individualism.Most men, for instance, see their vehicles as extensions of their virility and masculinity.Vehicula viagra,if you will. Can we envision soccer Mom's piling their kids onto buses for day care or after school events? Getting them onto a train or bus will be very tough and will take generations to accomplish. And that's completely contingent on Ms Quiroz's last observation on polling: Folks now don't want it."

15. Norman wrote on May 1, 2008 7:30 AM:
"Does SANDAG have to run their public comments by the Mayors office before a public broadcast? If so, what they say must truly be for real, right? Because the Mayors office never lies :-) If they don't need to get the Mayors approval, I suggest they do so our strong Mayor can make sure SANDAG isn't lieing to us."

16. Sparky wrote on May 1, 2008 8:30 PM:
"SANDAG is not paying attention and are all in a dream state. Until they wake up and place a light rail system north in the inland corridor from downtown to Riverside and then provide bus transportation that will allow users to get to work and other places people will NOT get out of their cars. I tried the bus several times. Having to get up at 4am and be on a bus at 5:55 to get to work downtown at 7:35 and then walk 7 blocks to work arriving a little before 8 then getting on the bus to go home only to arrive at the dinner table at 7:15... forget it. I can drive from north county in 35 minutes, home in 45 and do errands when needed on the way home. Wake up SANDAG. The added lanes on 15 will NOT help."

17. tom wrote on May 2, 2008 7:58 AM:
"is it true that for every bus ticket sold the county taxpayer subsidies that purchase with 20 cents AND for every ticket sold for the coaster (sprinter too?) the tax payer pays an additional $8.00 ?? Another great job by our elected officials.."

18. Simple Guy wrote on May 2, 2008 9:49 AM:
"Is it true that the average daily single-occupancy vehicle commute in San Diego is subsidized by $2.20 in taxpayer funds for freeway and road construction, repair and maintenance, plus 48 cents in public service subsidies for police patrols, health care costs and costs from accidents? Our car-based transportation system is HUGELY subsidized by the taxpayers."

19. Wide Awake.. wrote on May 3, 2008 12:44 AM:
"Doubtful, SANDAG('s) poll, "whose Transportation Committee says that polling shows that the people don't want transit," is accurate, are considered by the Realtor's Group I've belonged to for 17 yrs. to be continuously wrong in their polling. Perhaps polling Jack in Bonsall is one problem, he's got to drive to get anywhere! If we DON'T do something 'smart' like transit, with the housing planned for Miramar & the 40,000 acres around it, we will be LA, overnite. (like their 'plan' to turn Montgomery into '10,000 units!'). I've been & am 'out there in bus. for 21 yrs. now in RE and 'the people WANT it!' Gas prices, road rage & baby boom emergencies (a huge portion of drivers) will soon be demandin transit...so don't remove from SD's future its Public funding ability, we must have enough acreage for TWO full-sized runways-12,500 ft. each. The Reality..."

20. ...Wide Awake wrote on May 3, 2008 1:07 AM:
"The Reality is with a real airport, comes not only that $40-50+ BILLION/yr. Economic Benefit, but an FAA funded transit system to our 18 cities! Do 'homework', see missing transportation stability vs. Phoenix, Denver, Atlanta, even overbuilt Panama City Beach FL, new adjunct for overcrowded Atlanta! All S. CA is 'at capacity' by 2015 or so. SD'll be 'left out, behind & so costly to visit,' few will. If 'tourism' is prime, 'making it difficult for them to come, spend their vacation $$$ & leave' isn't helping! Let's look at our Region's needs First, not just the 'downtown tourism crowd', then we'll have the means to do more to mitigate for all the infrastructure that is used & abused by tourists! We're not gaining much from them for damage, use & devouring of our natural resources: water; roads; sewer; park/rec maintenance; lighting; beach, emergency, police, fire, etc."