Welcome to
Citizens for a Safe
Golden Gate Bridge©
The Official Web Site
for all Public Documents, Records, Information, and other vital records of
Suicides, Head-on Collisions.
http://www.goldengatecitizens.com
"Click On My Chair"
This could happen to you...!
The Golden Gate Bridge and Highway District has
prolong traffic control for more than six decades now. Please be advised, that you could end-up in a
wheel chair, or even death, by driving on undivided lanes of the
Golden Gate Bridge under present conditions...
"It has come to our attention that, the Golden
Gate Bridge Board District is not protecting all who drive, walk, or bike
across the span, because of several reasons... There is no
financial gain in securing the safety of others for the following reasons:
(1. As long as the Golden Gate Bridge Board District makes a legal
attempt to the following conditions, we may never have a movable barrier
or a suicide barrier on the span. These items will not make any money for the
district, but will cost them over 8.25 million dollars out of their
pocket. For the Golden Gate Bridge District it will be a losing
proposition. The Golden Gate Bridge District is in the business of making
money not spending it." (The statement above will
come to the attention of the Grand Jury of the State of California in the
near future...
Section 835 of the California Government Code Dangerous Condition of Public
Property
Provides: Except as provided by statute, a public entity is liable for injury
caused by a dangerous condition of its property if the plaintiff
establishes that the property was in a dangerous condition at the time of
the injury, that the injury was proximately caused by the dangerous
condition, that the dangerous condition created a reasonably foreseeable
risk of the kind of injury which was incurred, and that either: (a) A negligent
or wrongful act or omission of an employee of the public entity within the
scope of his employment created the dangerous condition; or (b) The public entity had
actual or constructive notice of the dangerous condition under § 835.2 a sufficient time
prior to the injury to have taken measures to protect against the
dangerous condition.
A dangerous condition is
defined as: A
condition of property that creates a substantial (as distinguished from a
minor, trivial or insignificant) risk of injury when such property or
adjacent property is used with due care in a manner in which it is
reasonably foreseeable that it will be used.
Section 830.6
and Design Immunity
Section 830.6 of the Government Code provides: Neither a public entity nor a public employee is liable under this
chapter for an injury caused by the plan or design of a construction of,
or an improvement to, public property where such plan or design has been
approved in advance of the construction or improvement by the
legislative body of the public entity or by some other body or employee
exercising discretionary authority to give such approval or where such
plan or design is prepared in conformity with standards previously so
approved, if the trial or appellate court determines that there is any
substantial evidence upon the basis of which (a) a reasonable public
employee could have adopted the plan or design or the standards therefor
or (b) a reasonable legislative body or other body or employee could
have approved the plan or design or the standards therefor. Design immunity is a
statutorily created affirmative defense available to public entities
when it is argued that the design of an improvement is a “dangerous
condition” that caused an injury? It is “often raised on motion for
summary judgment or non-suit enabling the trial court to find the
defense established as a matter of law.”~ If the public entity can
show that the allegedly “dangerous
condition” was a part of the improvement’s design, that it had the
discretion to approve the design, and that there was substantial
evidence to support its conclusion that the design was reasonable, then
the public entity is not liable for injuries the design may have
caused.24 More
concretely, so long as a suicide barrier’s construction conforms to
its design, an argument that the design actually increased the risk of
harm to someone attempting suicide would be unavailing, so long as the
entity approving the design had some substantial evidence to support its
conclusion that the design was reasonable. Even if the argument
was that the barrier was negligently constructed -- that it did not in fact
conform to its design --the public entity might still have a
defense.
Section 830.6 also provides:
Notwithstanding notice that constructed or improved public
property may no longer be in conformity with a plan or design.., which
reasonably could be approved by the legislative body or other body or
employee, the immunity provided by this section shall continue for a
reasonable period of time sufficient to permit the public entity to
obtain funds for and carry out remedial work necessary to allow such
public property to be in conformity with a plan or
design approved by the legislative body of the public entity or other
body or employee.
Cal.
Gov’t. Code § 830.6.
Public Law Research Institute May22,
1998
Due to the inability of the Board of Directors and the lack of power that the "Building & Operations Committee" have illustrated, they refuse to commit to any safety issues of any kind…This has gone on to long. Its time for "BSI" Movable Median Traffic Barrier, now, to stop all head-on collisions. Also, we concur that the suicide deterrent (Z-Clip) system has been talked about for 50 years now. And the "Newest" safety measure to date on the Golden Gate Bridge, is that of the “Public Safety Railing.” These safety issues have been on the table for many, and many of years now, and need to be addressed. Citizen for a Safe Golden Gate Bridge is trying to protect all who drive, walk and bicycle across this vital link between San Francisco and Marin Counties. It's time for the Golden Gate Bridge-Board of No-Directors to become directors and start to direct the bridge manager Celia Kupersmith & the “New District Engineer to commence to the safety issues at hand. How long should we wait-for another 40 years, or so... Please, contact the Golden Gate Bridge District, or me at rmgbabbitt@sbcglobal.net and voice your opinion.
|
This site is best viewed Microsoft Internet Explorer. |
|
|
Founder &
Chairman of the Board |
|
|
*Director John P. Ehlen, PE Mining |
Director Alexandra F. Ehlen |
|
* Director Frank Schweiger |
* Director Danna Kirkbride |
|
The Board
is made-up of three * victims
of a head-on collision's |
|
|
Golden Gate Citizens Link's |
|
As you can see, there is little damage to the
car from hitting the barrier, and your life was spared...
"It's a red-letter day," said Nancy Read, a bridge board member from Petaluma. "It's the right thing to do, to prevent crossover accidents, to make the most beautiful bridge in the world and the safest." Director Nancy Read & President Fraser with channel 4-news anchor Anthony Moore; upper-right photograph (The Press Democrat, May 23, 1998)
