BART ‘seat hog’ law may go out of service
Police lacked plan to implement ordinance — many on new board call it mean-spirited
BART’s “seat hog” ordinance became law last fall, making it illegal for passengers to take up more than a single seat on a commute train. But it has never been enforced, and it may never be.
The transit agency’s Board of Directors passed the ordinance on a 5-4 vote on April 14, 2016, after much debate over whether it singled out homeless people, and it became law on Oct. 10. And then, nothing happened.
BART police are waiting for an enforcement policy to be approved by the board, said BART spokesman Taylor Huckaby. But the board is waiting for the Police Department, which has been
“There is a law. What was the BART board doing? If you can’t get it done in a year, you can’t get it done.” Jon Krueger, BART commuter who supports last fall’s law to prevent passengers from taking up too much space during peak hours
without a chief since the end of the year, to recommend a strategy. BART’s new police chief, Carl Rojas, is to start May 24.
Meanwhile, the composition of BART’s board has changed, and its president, Rebecca Saltzman, never a fan of the ordinance, says she’ll try to get it overturned if an enforcement plan is ever put in place.
“I intend to bring it back,” she said, “and the results may be different.”
Director Joel Keller of Brentwood, who suggested the ordinance in early 2016 and pushed through its narrow passage, said he was surprised the law hadn’t been put into effect yet. He had recently requested that BART police provide him with information on how many citations had been issued under Ordinance 2016-1, which BART calls the “one-ticket, one-seat” ordinance. Others refer to it as the “seat hog” or the “man-spreading” ordinance.
Keller said he believes publicity about the ordinance has reduced the problem, but he still wants it to be enforced. His constituents, most of whom face long and pricey BART rides, deserve to have as many seats available as possible, he said.
“We are way behind in reviewing that policy,” he said. “It’s disappointing. I know it was controversial, but a lot of people thought it was a step toward ensuring that the limited number of seats (on a train) is available.
“They get tired of seeing seats taken up by luggage, personal property and people sleeping on two seats.”
That was the intent of the ordinance, to prevent seats from being occupied by the suitcase of an airport-bound passenger or by the sprawled legs of a sleeping rider, leaving passengers to stand.
People who were found taking up more than a single seat during commute hours would first be given a warning. After that, the first ticket would cost $100. The penalty would increase to $200 for a second violation and to $500 after that. People whose size or medical condition requires them to occupy more than a single space would be exempt.
The ordinance was intended to be enforced from 6 to 10 a.m. and 3 to 7:30 p.m., the peak hours for BART commuters.
Many, perhaps most, of the 423,000 passengers a day that pack onto BART trains believed the law was already in effect, even if it seemed like a low priority for police. Jon Krueger, a software engineer who commutes from Dublin/ Pleasanton Station to Montgomery Street Station daily, was among them.
On at least a couple of occasions over the past six months, Krueger used the BART Watch app on his phone to notify agency police of passengers sprawled across multiple seats on his train. Typically reports were met with silence or a suggestion that he request a “welfare check” on the safety of a snoozing rider taking up more than a single seat.
But last Monday, he got a confusing response after reporting two riders sprawled across seats.
“There is no ‘Seat Hog Rule,’ ” the unsigned message read. “Although BART is trying to get one established.”
Krueger was appalled. He looked up stories from last year to make sure the ordinance had been passed, then contacted The Chronicle.
“There is a law,” he said. “What was the BART board doing? If you can’t get it done in a year, you can’t get it done.”
Alicia Trost, a BART spokeswoman, confirmed that no ordinance was in place, and the agency later clarified that, while it had been passed, the Board of Directors was waiting for an implementation plan from BART police.
“We are waiting on the police to bring their plan before the board,” spokesman Huckaby said.
Acting Police Chief Jeffrey Jennings did not respond to requests for comment. Huckaby said he didn’t know the reasons for the delay in developing an enforcement plan and suggested asking members of the board.
The ordinance seemed to take a detour in June when then-Chief Kenton Rainey introduced a policy in which officers would question those taking up more than a single seat, record their names and check their criminal records. As part of the policy, police would keep the names of offenders.
Some directors bristled and sent the police back to rethink the proposal. The board never delayed the law’s enforcement, and enforcement guidelines were supposed to be presented in October. They still haven’t been.
Now Saltzman, of Oakland, said she wants the plan killed altogether. She said she sees the ordinance as an attack on homeless people and a waste of BART’s limited police resources. With three new directors on the board, she believes the law can be rescinded. The board’s new makeup would probably make director Lateefah Simon of Oakland the deciding vote.
Simon, who replaced Zakhary Mallett, an ordinance supporter, said she plans to vote to defeat the ordinance, which she considers offensive.
“When it comes up, I can guarantee you that Director Saltzman and I and other directors who care about equity will make sure it sunsets,” she said.
Krueger, meanwhile, is stunned that BART has let the ordinance go ignored so soon after its passage.
“I’m really disappointed in the BART system,” he said. “I’m somewhat astounded at their stonewalling. Seems to me, at this point, a year after it was adopted, you have a really good reason or you have an apology.”