Just the facts

Feb 18, 2026
Feb 18, 2026
13

Editor,

A recent letter writer accused me of inflating the number of parking spaces removed for the Humboldt Bike Lane Project, stating that it was only 100, not the 200 I had mentioned.

(13) comments

Terence Y Feb 18, 2026 8:49am

Thanks for your letter, Mr. Donnelly, and your clarifications rebutting spurious accusations. Based on LTEs and comments from cycling advocates, I’ve come to the conclusion that a cohort of cycling advocates are throwing everything at the wall and hoping something sticks, much of it based on feelings and not facts. Another fact is that dedicated bicycle lanes are highly discriminatory to those who live in the Humboldt area. It’s past time for the city to fix their mistake and remove those bicycle lanes.

Connie Weiss Feb 18, 2026 9:24am

Thank you, Tim, for your calling out the truth on the Humboldt bike lanes. It confounds me that year after year, the Bike Coalition and the City try to hide the injustice done to North Central residents by removing over 200 parking spaces for bike lanes on a truck thoroughfare that are never used. It’s ok to say the master bike plan has areas that can be improved or corrected, making it a living plan that benefits all residents. In fact, the solution in plain site is to make San Mateo Drive the main N/S bike lanes - lanes already installed, few trucks and slower cars, and easy access to nearby schools. I travel on both Humboldt and San Mateo Drive regularly, and while neither street shows a ton of bike traffic, there is always more on San Mateo Drive because, quite frankly, it is safer… Safe Streets for All!

easygerd Feb 18, 2026 10:19am

TIm is not a "daily cyclist" - not in a hundred years.

No real cyclist likes to wait behind 10 air-polluting cars on a "Bicycle Boulevard" when he can go to the fresh-air front in a bike lane.

On my daily travel I see all sorts of people using and loving bike lanes:

- mail delivery

- package delivery

- food delivery

- police

- firetrucks

- ambulance

- ride share companies

- people sitting in cars texting

- people sleeping in their cars

- adults on scooters/Vespa

- adults on motorcycles

- kids on e-Motos

- and even people on bicycles

They all are using bike lanes, legally or illegally. But they all love bike lanes.

And here we have these "Vehicular Cyclists" always popping up pretending they don't want them. But what I have never ever seen is a "vehicular cyclist" like Tim waiting in the car lane instead of riding the bike lane to the front. NEVER.

Trina Feb 19, 2026 1:50pm

I appreciate your article. I am glad you informed San Mateans that it nwas not only 200 spaces removed, but many other parking spaces on various streets in North Central as many curbs were painted red, with additional parking spaces removed. I agree with you, so many people promote safety, but show no remorse regarding seniors and disabled residents. To schedule an appointment with a Physical Therapist can take up to a month & half. Many reside in not only this neighborhood but, all throughout San Mateo. Not everyone is physically able to ride a bike, walk blocks after parking their car, two, three, four or five blocks.

Here is another issue so many refuse to see or read for themselves, as they continue to judge others or ignore what the General Plan states: so let me just school some of the residents in San Mateo:

General Plan:

Prepare a Plan for the Equity Priority Communities. The plan will seek to ensure the streets in each community are measurably safe, include ADA accessibility and have adequate on-street parking.

Now this flows right into why the funds were granted to North Central from the CDBG funds. No where were the funds to be used to install a bike lane, the only mention is for maintenance of an existing bike lane, which was ok. It was definitely NOT to use all the funds to INSTALL a bike lane, which exhausted all the funds (misappropriated the funds).

Thank you Tim for opening the eyes of our San Mateans.

Safe Streets for ALL

easygerd Feb 19, 2026 3:05pm

This is all about San Mateo Democrats stealing established and well-like bike lanes from low-income children and seniors. Now they are coming after their e-Bikes as well.

And they always try to use "REVERSE-EQUITY" arguments to justify their immoralities.

At least two mayor misleading facts in this post:

- Safety and ADA accessibility means people in wheelchairs, on e-bikes or knee scooters. ADA relevant residents that drive have streets everywhere and mandatory blue spots already. They have drive-thru restaurants, groceries, even pharmacies. This is about the majority of ADA residents that don't drive.

- It's about the 30-40% of residents that cannot drive, don't want to drive, or absolutely shouldn't drive (age, health, medication, addiction, no license, no money, other disabilities, etc.)

- It's about those old people that drive their cars into ACE Hardware stores and can't remember how they got here. We need to have non-driving alternatives for them.

- on-street "parking" is meant for services like garbage collection, mail delivery, packet delivery, food services, disability services, street cleaning.

- on-street "private car storage" is MOST DEFINITELY not part of the Equity Priority Communities framework

- Equity Priority Communities are communities HARMED by cars, either by car violence or car pollution (air, water, noise, microplastics) => more cars can never be the solution

- the designation "Equity Focus Areas" or "Community of Concerns" is exactly the opposite of "poor people with too many cars" - it is about the "poorer people with no cars"

This nonsense about "poor people need more parking space" used by people not even living in this area has been a deliberate switcheroo of what Equity Focus Areas are. And that is the reason why EFAs magically never seem to get better in Democrat counties.

Connie Weiss Feb 19, 2026 7:08pm

So interesting to read as it is clear you have never lived in this neighborhood nor does it seem you have any friends you visit there…

easygerd Feb 19, 2026 8:17pm

Connie, aren't you living in Baywood?

"Private Car Storage" is a very localized, very personal issue to only 20% of the residents living there. It's a problem for those with four or more cars.

"Transportation," on the other hand, is a very regional, very public issue as it benefits far, far more people on this planet.

And yet, the proponents of this project are living close by (Move San Mateo), whereas the opposition to this project came from farther away. The opposition to these bike lanes came from Baywood, Gramercy-Mounds, Indian Springs Park, San Mateo Heights, Downtown Belmont, North Shoreview, Easton Addition, Timberland Park, San Bruno, Pacifica, and various others.

This seemed like an organized group financed by the automotive and fossil fuel industries. There were several players with "corporate interest" in the opponent group.

San Mateo Democrats still have some explaining to do, why they would listen to outsiders.

Connie Weiss Feb 20, 2026 12:03am

I do live in Baywood but am in North Central frequently for visits with friends as well as volunteer work. I would never think to dictate to those living there what they should think or do, but I am more than happy to support them as they fight for the return of their parking, especially because biking on San Mateo Drive is much safer than the truck thoroughfare of Humboldt.

joebob91 Feb 21, 2026 2:54pm

Why is biking safer on SM Drive than Humboldt?

easygerd Feb 21, 2026 4:27pm

We have a solution then.

If you think forcing people on bicycles to go completely out of their way and ride (unsafe) San Mateo Drive, then people in cars can easily be made to go out of their way as well. Using the same argument, the city can then block all cars from Humboldt Street completely. Shut it down for cars - except the handful of residents with permit stickers - and make all others use US-101, I-280, ECR and N. Amphlett Blvd instead.

Now we have all kinds of space on Humboldt Street incl. private car storage and 'guest parking'.

Connie Weiss Feb 22, 2026 7:55am

Joebob91 - I drove both Humboldt and San Mateo Dr. frequently. San Mateo Dr. is a wider street, most trucks do not travel there, cars, drive slower. There are dedicated bike lanes on most of the route, and the bike lanes connect to California drive bike lanes in Burlingame. Humboldt has none of that. It is a truck thoroughfare the street is narrow and cars drive much faster. It’s a no-brainer to ride on San Mateo Dr. over Humboldt.

Terence Y Feb 23, 2026 8:32am

eGerd – TBot here. Hilarious. There you go again…throwing stuff at the wall and hoping something sticks. It doesn’t. To wit, at the beginning, you’ve proposed blocking all cars from Humboldt completely and at the end, you say there are all kinds of space on Humboldt Street for your ill-defined private car storage and ‘guest parking.’ But cars are completely blocked from Humboldt Street which means there is no way for cars to get to their private car storage or guest parking. See, nothing is sticking. Next launch, please.

easygerd Feb 24, 2026 4:38pm

TBot, I think at this point you are legally required to mention that you are one of the thousands of lobbyists working for the automotive and fossil industries in Washington DC and Sacramento.

No self-respecting "conservative" chatbot would ever side with the biggest government giveaway in America: the "freeway" and the "free car storage" system.

Gasoline taxes - also known as "Vice and Sinner's Taxes - used to pay down the national debt after war times. Now the National Debt is paying for the Ministry of War AND the extensive network of "freeways" and "free car storage".

You might claim to be a conservative, but only a car-lobbyist or car-socialist could get behind this unpatriotic scheme created by people too unpatriotic and lazy to walk or bike.

Thank you for visiting the Daily Journal.

Please purchase a Premium Subscription to continue reading. To continue, please log in, or sign up for a new account.

We offer one free story view per month. If you register for an account, you will get two additional story views. After those three total views, we ask that you support us with a subscription.

A subscription to our digital content is so much more than just access to our valuable content. It means you’re helping to support a local community institution that has, from its very start, supported the betterment of our society. Thank you very much!