BART Board Opposes Bill to Decriminalize Fare Evasion

On Thursday, the Bay Area Rapid Transit Board of Directors voted to oppose a fare evasion bill introduced by Assemblyman Isaac Bryan (D-Los Angels).

The Board voted 5-3 to oppose a bill that seeks to longer categorize as a misdemeanor the third or subsequent violation, by an adult, of evading the payment of a public transit fare; the misuse of a transfer, pass, ticket, or token with the intent to evade the payment of a fare; or the unauthorized use of a discount ticket. Instead, the violation would be an infraction punishable by a fine not to exceed $400.

According to data provided by Bart Police Department, the department issued approximately 2,350 citations for fare evasion in 2021 and approximately 1,800 citations in 2022. In 2021, 48 cases, or approximately 2% of all citations, were associated with a misdemeanor for fare evasion compared to 26 cases, or approximately 1.4% of citations, in 2022.

Although the BART Police Officers’ Association opposed the bill, BART Staff, including its police chief did not take a public position.

Director Debora Allen challenged the “no position” by the police chief asking Deputy Chief Galetti if that was her position, “that it doesn’t matter to the police department whether this misdemeanor charges is eliminated or stays”.

“The police department is aligning with the district in not having a position on this matter,” responded Galetti.

Allen called it compelling that its being used in cases where it will make a difference and the police officers association says they want the tool because removing it would lesson their ability to enforce the law in the system.

“At the end of the day, that is what we should all be here for. Especially at a time when are projecting $300 million plus per year deficits and we are out looking for new funding,” said Allen. “We are struggling to bring riders back and every single survey that we have say that personal safety, security and feeling safe is at top of mind for riders.”

Allen said she was surprised by the police department leadership would take no position—including after speaking with the interim chief.

“I am very surprised that you will just be okay if you decriminalize something that we currently have the ability to tack on a misdemeanor for somebody who has done something in the system far worse, but aside from that,” said Allen who noted officers have said they have the ability to offer warnings and those warnings are going up while citations are going down. “Our officers do have compassion.”

Allen also asked Galetti if she believed that the misdemeanor provision is charged with a more violent crime does the District Attorney’s Office look at multiple charges and if it helps the District Attorneys Office.

Galetti sidestepped the question by stating she would have to look at the data because each county is different and it would depend on the District Attorney in office—but the majority look to be connected to other more serious charges.

Allen responded stating she spoke to someone in the District Attorney’s Office in Contra Costa County who told her she didn’t know why anyone would say this law has no consequence because the DA’s wouldn’t take that misdemeanor on its own and act upon it because in my own county they absolutely would take a look at it while looking at other criteria.

“I oppose this bill so strongly,” stated Allen. “Every time we remove the ability for our police officers to charge a misdemeanor in a limited number of instances where its warranted for serial fare evasion, we are essentially turning the other way and I think we are sending a message to the men and women out there in our system trying to keep the peace,” explained Allen. “We are sending a message to the riders that says BART doesn’t care. Once we lose this provision, we will never get it back because its decriminalization.”

Allen contends the public has spoken loudly about the lack of enforcement of laws in the BART system and this bill would take away another provision or they took a weak “no position” on the bill.

“If we have no position sitting at this dais, it means we don’t care,” stated Allen who explained she believed everyone on the board cared, but for some reason they have not cared enough to talk about AB 819 until they have one committee meeting left before it hits the senate before going to the governors office. “I can’t help but say we can prevent some of the bad behavior in our system by getting tougher on fare evasion.”

Allen then motioned for the Board to oppose AB 819 which was seconded.

Director Robert Raburn stated the author of AB 819 marginalized the impacts of fare evasion by comparing it to toll or parking violations.

“Fare evasions impacts are a magnitude greater,” said Raburn noting it represents a direct financial loss to transit agencies and is the gateway to other crimes aboard transit that deter paying passengers. “BART police have said 80% arrested for crimes have not paid a fare. Our own survey shows the public is concerned about safety.”

He continued to highlight BART’s financial woes while also noting fare evasion compounds the problem with lost revenue while noting their recent survey showed 23% of BART riders reported seeing a fare evader—this was up over 6% from prior year. He said fare evasion must stop.

“The bill’s author also says fare evasion is discriminatory. What a slap in the face,’ said Raburn saying BART’s oversight and officer training has been the model for other agencies. “I’ll remind everyone that it was a racist serial fare evader John Cowell who murdered Letifah Wilson aboard a BART train in 2018. We need greater fare evasion enforcement, not reduced penalties”

Raburn also stated he cringed to contemplate the “lawlessness that would result” should AB 819 be signed into law giving impunity to serial fare evaders. He would support the motion to oppose AB 819.

Board President Janice Li stated not having a position does not mean “we don’t care” and there are other bills that impact BART that they do not take a position on—noting they maybe take a position on a dozen bills.

She noted the 5-0 vote in the Senate Public Safety Committee included three bay area legislators in Senators Nancy Skinner, Scott Wiener and Aisha Wahab. She also said in the Assembly no Bay Area legislators voted against the bill and instead supported AB 819.

“I don’t think BART taking a position will change the outcome of this bill,” said Li. “If we feel otherwise, I think its our egos talking honestly.”

She argued they already have tools in place to combat fare evasion while arguing she didn’t see how taking a position on AB 819 helps and how the impact is incredibly significant.

“I personally prefer not to take a position on this bill, and I am aligned with the original staff position which is no position at all,” said Li.  “If forced to take a position, I don’t support the original motion on the table and would be open to a support position on this bill but that is not my preference. I prefer to simply watch.”

Director Mark Foley said they use tools to fight fare evasion and yet they are still losing revenue to fare evasion which is revenue they need.

“I don’t want to remove a tool that helps us to deter fare evasion. A tool that is used very sparingly by our sworn officers. They know how to use the tool effectively and they use restraint at issuing those misdemeanor citation,” said Foley. “I am concerned that the bills author is stating this is an issue around discriminatory fare evasion practices because I believe if the author was truly concerned about that they would help fund operating offense for all public transit agencies so that transit agencies would be free. That is the solution. If you want to combat fare evasion, cover operating expenses and make transit free. You remove the barrier. I don’t believe this is the right approach to address that need as a society. I am opposed to this bill.”

Director John McPartland opposed the bill who disagreed with the Board President that this is a political issue, but rather it’s a safety issue. He wanted to provide law enforcement with tools they need to enforce the law. He supported the motion by Director Allen.

Director Allen responded to the comments that “the bill will pass anyway” calling it “absurd” because if no one opposes it that it would pass.

“But we have the opportunity to oppose it so that could have an opposition as well as Foothill Transit who has opposed it, now you have two transit agencies so that could have a big impact,” said Allen while the Bay Area Council has also offered opposition.  “The reason this bill made it so far without little opposition is because no one knew about it. It was not presented to us as a Board other than a bills of interest list… this bill flew under the radar which is why its made it to this point but it doesn’t have to keep going that way.”

Director Bevan Dufty said the fare gates will not be completed until 2025 and state legislators are asking BART to look at safety. He said he would support the motion.

Director Rebecca Saltzman said she would not support the bill saying the Assemblymember brought it forward because it was an issue in his District. She wanted more information about what he was trying to target before going out and opposing because there could be a reason.

She said with new fare gates, less people will getting ticketing for fare evasion because we will have less people fare evading. She then argued there are a lot of infractions around vehicles and evading tolls which none of them lead to misdemeanor.

“You can have 10 parking tickets, you are still not going to have a misdemeanor, the only way it gets to a misdemeanor is if you consistently don’t pay those things,” said Saltzman. “Why is it that I can get 10, 20 parking tickets, evade tolls 10-20 times and till not getting a misdemeanor but because I dare ride transit and don’t have the fare to pay, I get a misdemeanor? I think that is the goal of this bill, to bring it in line with the rest of the ways of the enforce our society. Why should car drivers not be subject to misdemeanors but transit riders who often are the lowest income, most disadvantaged who are the only ones who are susceptible to it. I understand some people are gaming the system with fare evasion and they are not doing it because they cannot afford to pay, but there are legitimately cannot afford to pay which is why we passed the pricing for clipper to have a 50% discount. We are doing a lot of great things.”

She urged the board to make it more “equitable” and incentive more taking transit and not public transit riders more than car drivers.

“Why is it we should have a misdemeanor for fare evasion but don’t have it for any of the similar car offenses which is basically he same thing not paying a ticket, taking money from the city. Not paying for toll. Why does this get singled out?” stated Saltzman. “I think all this bill does is bring transit inline with cars. Why should transit riders should be criminalized more than car riders. To me, it makes no sense.”

She urged the Board not to take a position on the bill and instead focus on fixing the fare gates to take people out of the pipeline to fare evade.

The board then voted 5-3 to oppose AB819:

• Directors Debora Allen, Robert Raburn, John McPartland, Mark Foley and Bevan Dufty voted in favor of a motion to oppose the bill.
• Board President Janice Li and Directors Rebecca Saltzman and Lateefah Simon voted against the motion.
• Director Liz Ames absent.