The Boondoggle Chronicles IV

Vote NO on Prop. A -- June 2, 2026 -- NO on Prop. A -- for Equal Fire Protection for All

On February 18th I published this report — The Boondoggle Chronicles III. That essay focused on the word “wasteful” from the above definition for the word “boondoggle.”

“Today, we are going to examine, in brief, the June 2026 Earthquake Safety & Emergency Response Bond allocation to Muni (SFMTA), ostensibly for the repair and seismic retrofit of the Potrero Bus Facility.

Wait, Muni? Muni is in the June 2026 ESER Bond? For $200 million?”

The Boondoggle Chronicles III, John Crabtree, Though the Heavens Fall (2/18/26)

Today, I am going to depart from the logical sequence of this series, just for today, to define the word “ostensibly” because it is a crucial concept in this overarching analysis.

Ostensibly [adverb]

os·​ten·​si·​bly; ä-ˈsten(t)-sə-blē

1: in a manner that conceals or may conceal what is true or real

2: to all outward appearances

“Allowing, for the moment, that the city is earnest in this statement, and considering that — after 16 years, 3 ESER bonds (2010, 2014, 2020) and $312.5 million earmarked for expansion of the high-pressure, post-earthquake firefighting water infrastructure (e.g. AWSS) into unprotected SF neighborhoods — prior ESER bonds resulted in ZERO high-pressure AWSS hydrants and ZERO miles of AWSS pipe laid in those unprotected neighborhoods — how can the city consider diverting nearly 40% [$200 million] of the proposed June 2026 ESER bond for Muni and the Potrero Bus Facility?

… If expansion is VITAL — and no one, not me, not the city, no one — will argue that it is not, then how does it make any sense to divert nearly 40% ($200 million/$535 million) of the June 2026 Earthquake Safety & Emergency Response Bond to Muni and, ostensibly, the Potrero Bus Facility while high-pressure, post-earthquake firefighting water supply is allocated a pittance — $130 million or 24% of total bond revenues.”

The Boondoggle Chronicles III, John Crabtree, Though the Heavens Fall (2/18/26)

Here is the thing, the ostensible nature of what SFMTA has planned for spending the $200 million for Muni from the June 2026 Earthquake Safety (ESER) bond ought to have just about everyone up in arms.

[Wait, Muni? Muni is in the June 2026 ESER Bond? For $200 million?”]

Imagine for a moment, in a parallel universe where no one is around to point out the deficiencies in the June 2026 ESER Bond; and that the measure goes into effect and SFMTA rakes in the $200 million set aside in the bond for Muni. And then imagine, low-and-behold, the Potrero Bus Facility doesn’t get prioritized for repair, as all the ballot materials have suggested it will be.

[excerpt immediately above from Department of Public Works ESER 2026 Bond Report]

Oh, I know, someone is going to read this essay and tell me something like, “Well John, they probably want to use non-committal language like that just in case they cannot get it all done…” Umm, you think?

Moreover, if they fritter away the $200 million on whatever and have little or nothing to show for it — do you think that nearly everyone whose first-order concern is saving Muni would be just as frustrated as everyone whose first-order concern is expanding high-pressure, post-earthquake firefighting hydrants and pipes (AWSS) into unprotected neighborhoods and have seen zero progress on that front?

[Wait, Muni? Muni is in the June 2026 ESER Bond? For $200 million?”]

I will wager that Muni supporters and AWSS supporters would be frustrated to somewhere near the same degree if that scenario came to pass. If you doubt me that such an outcome is possible or even likely, consider these questions:

• How many years has SFPUC gone now since they took over AWSS from SFFD without installing a single high-pressure, AWSS fire hydrant or laying a single mile of AWSS pipeline in unprotected neighborhoods?

  • Answer = 16 years

• How many ESER bonds have been approved by voters, with bonds sold and bond revenues collected?

  • Answer = 3 bonds (2010, 2014, 2020)

    • June 2026 ESER Bond will be the fourth ESER bond brought to the ballot.

• How much bond money has been borrowed, in total, already?

  • Answer = $1.44 billion

• How much of that $1.44 billion was intended for the use of expanding the high-pressure, post-earthquake firefighting water system (AWSS) into unprotected neighborhoods?

  • Answer = $312.5 million

• And again, how many high-pressure, AWSS hydrants have been installed in the more than 15 unprotected neighborhoods across almost two-thirds of the city since 2010?

  • Answer = ZERO

• How many miles of high-pressure, AWSS pipelines have been laid in unprotected neighborhoods?

  • Answer = ZERO

If ever you doubt that something other than what is described in the bond measure supporting reports and documents could happen to that $200 for Muni, just take a short stroll through the six questions and answers outlined immediately above.

[Wait, Muni? Muni is in the June 2026 ESER Bond? For $200 million?”]

“Ostensibly” is not a concept that should exist in documents regarding a bond measure. If the city wants voters to support these efforts, don’t ask for a blank check, show your plan, show your work.

— The Boondoggle Chronicles

— The Boondoggle Chronicles II

— The Boondoggle Chronicles III

— AWSS vs. Westside Potable Boondoggle

— AWSS v. Western Potable EFWS Boondoggle

— AWSS YES! -- PUC Potable Boondoggle NO!

— AWSS vs. SF PUC’s Western Potable Boondoggle

[photograph of a framed photograph entitled “1906” — courtesy of Brother’s Pizza on Taraval, where it hangs on the wall — photo of photo taken by John Crabtree]