San Francisco Chronicle

We can let most jaywalkers walk

-

Jaywalking is one of those criminal offenses that many of us don’t think twice about committing. We need to cross the street, any approachin­g cars are a safe distance away, so off we trot from one side to the next midblock. Simple and straightfo­rward — unless you have black or brown skin, or are for some other reason more likely to be cited for breaking a broadly ignored law. Then you can be singled out by a police officer itching to write a ticket. And citations aren’t cheap: The base fine set by California is a hefty $197.

The selective enforcemen­t of jaywalking is the focus of a recently introduced bill by Assembly Member Phil Ting — legislatio­n that is long overdue.

The measure, AB1238, would delete a provision in current law that “pedestrian­s shall not cross the roadway at any place except in a crosswalk” on blocks with traffic signals. Instead, it would emphasize that “a pedestrian shall not be subject to a fine or criminal penalty for crossing or entering a roadway when no cars are present.”

Nor would a tickethapp­y police officer have the option of writing a citation because you’re walking on the right side of the road, with traffic, rather than against it on the left. Yes, at present, that’s required by law.

A compelling argument in favor of Ting’s bill is that misdemeano­rs of this sort tend to be enforced arbitraril­y and often in a racially disproport­ionate manner. A study by the Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights of the San Francisco Bay Area found that in 2019, about 10 of every 1,000 white adults in San Francisco got tickets for “local infraction­s” — a bundle of minor violations including jaywalking — while 43 of every 1,000 Black adults did. A 2017 study by the Sacramento Bee found that half of all jaywalking citations in the capital were issued to Black people, who constitute just 13% of the city’s population.

There’s another good reason to pass this legislatio­n: common sense. A case can be made that jaywalking, as it is practiced, is rarely very dangerous. Think about it: You’re on your guard, you look both ways, you don’t dither. There’s also less risk of a driver whipping around a corner heedlessly, as can happen to deadly effect in crosswalks at the end of a block.

“This is behavior that’s normal in a lot of situations,” Ting, DSan Francisco, said last week. “You make sure no cars are coming, because you don’t want to get killed. In cities, we’re trying to get people to walk more, not less. A big disincenti­ve to that is getting a ticket.”

Besides, nothing in the proposed legislatio­n would allow somebody to wander defiantly and foolishly into traffic on Sir Francis Drake Boulevard in San Rafael or El Camino Real on the Peninsula. While Ting’s proposed legislatio­n would prohibit police action if a jaywalker does not pose an “immediate hazard,” potentiall­y dangerous plunges into traffic would still be subject to citation.

Ting’s bill, which is to be considered by the Assembly Transporta­tion Committee later this month, would discourage excessive and selective policing. In a state with so many crises to surmount, the supposed peril of jaywalking should be low on the list.

 ?? Joe Rosenthal / The Chronicle 1959 ?? Jaywalkers are nothing new. Here’s one on S.F.’s Mission Street in 1959.
Joe Rosenthal / The Chronicle 1959 Jaywalkers are nothing new. Here’s one on S.F.’s Mission Street in 1959.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States