The BART Board of Directors on Thursday is expected to vote to require face masks (fully covering nose and mouth) while inside the paid area of BART until October 1, 2022.
The mandate can be extended past October 1 if extended by a Board of Directors resolution.
The previous mask mandate expired July 18, 2022. Currently, BART strongly encourages riders to wear masks in the system.
BS
Yet another reason not to use BART.
A friendly reminder that masks and vaccines work. We just need another two weeks to flatten the curve.
Yes!
@common censor – If mask mandates work, as you contend, explain this:
Alameda County instituted a mask mandate as of June 3.
Contra Costa didn’t.
If mask mandates work, you’d expect higher case rates in Contra Costa County than in Alameda County. That’s not what happened. The case rate following the Alameda County mask mandate is the same both in absolute and directional terms.
Evidence that masking policies reduce infections is theoretical, and the theories haven’t born out when applied at at any scale.
Im a lifelong Democrat and identify as a liberal. For the good of our party, let go of ideas that sounded good on paper but don’t withstand exposure to reality.
https://covidactnow.org/share/62602/?redirectTo=%2Fexplore%2F62602
@Commonor Censor – Total active infections is a noisy data point. The salient number here is NEW WEEKLY infections per 100k population (smooths outliers and adjusts for population). Further, alameda county rescinded the mask mandate on 6/25, so today’s stats are rather meaningless.
Here’s the data that matters:
JUNE 3 (Alameda County Mask Mandate Imposed):
Alameda Case rate: 301
Contra Costa case rates: 295
JUNE 25 (Alameda County Mask Mandate Rescinded)
JULY 15 (approximately 3 weeks ex-post):
Alameda Case rate: 371
Contra Costa case rates: 380
Both counties’ case rates INCREASED following the June 3 implementation date. The risk level in both counties was nearly identical three weeks after the mask mandate was rescinded. The takeaway?
Alameda county’s mask mandate has no effect in the cumulative infection rate.
If mask mandates worked to reduce risk, I would support them. They clearly do not, so I do not.
Why should the government impose a burden on the public that achieves no tangible public benefit?
I won’t be wearing a mask on BART – and they won’t do a God-damned thing about it.
Bunch of commies.
😁👍🏻
Why? Are they worried about their employee’s? Do they feel ridership will drop from fear? Or do they just want to tell people what to do?
Their employees were all Compulsory Vaxxed……which proves the vaccines DO NOT WORK.
We ALL know how they will vote.
Clown show
It should be up to the people. Covid is just a flu. Lol
It will be interesting to see how Debora Allen votes this time around as she will be on the November ballot bid for Contra Costa Board of Supervisors for District 4 to replace Mitchoff….her abstaining in May was that ” she felt the board did not have enough data and information on the efficacy of the different types of masks to consider whether a requirement would keep riders safe en masse.”
This pandemic has taught me to pay attention to the board of supervisors ideology and vote accordingly…had Allen voted NO last time around, she would have secured a YES on my ballot for her. The BOS wield broad power over our daily lives, as experienced with the nonsensical vaccine/ mask mandates…pay attention folks!
Debora Allen is the most conservative, common sense voice on the BART board. If elected to the BOS, she will also be the most conservative.
She has an uphill climb in November, so I don’t blame her if she goes wishy washy on a vote like this. Besides, if you took a survey of BART passengers (liberals that they are) you would find most supporting the masking.
Right…so call me a retrospective voter…this is a litmus test for future voting and I am supposed to accept wishy washy to get elected then groupthink if she is elected to BOS? The BART board decided to place a temporary amendment to the districts code of conduct to require masks in paid areas…ignoring the U.S. District Judge Kathryn Mizelle’s ruling that CDC does not have the authority to issue a mask mandate for air travel, or on public transportation. Riders should have a choice to wear the mask or not— not be ruled by the fiat of a group of Directors who have no medical, virologist or epidemiologist backgrounds.
Mask mandate passed on a 6-2 vote. Directors Allen and Raburn voting no.
Masks are for Halloween and the Lone Ranger.
And to think that schools used to BAN masks on Halloween… Ah, liberals. They sure do keep it interesting.
Wait. Didn’t they JUST end the mask mandate ??
Just two more weeks to flatten the curve. I’m sure they are getting the order from Newsome to do this.
A Tyvek suit is my go-to attire when riding BART.
I have decided I am not following the rules anymore, no one else does, I have also contemplated walking into the grocery store filling up my cart and walking out to my car without paying, you know equality and all…….
Take me with you. I can’t afford to buy food and supplies, especially when stealing $950 worth is OK!
Well, BART can do whatever they want no one is forced to take it.
Honestly I feel sorry for anyone that chooses BART as their daily or even occasional choice of transport.
But we are all still paying for it…
@Oh, please….Back when they were hyping BART before it was built, one of the selling points was that it would help clear SFBay Area’s crowded and congested roads and highways. See how well that worked out?
Gotta say it…they can’t enforce the “no pooping on the train rule” so….
+1
Good luck enforcing that.
I guess the real criminals will get a pass, as they always do.
Bart board members should be mandated to wear clown noses in public. I’m willing to put it to a vote
That made me laugh out loud, Martinez Mike!
While I’m fully vaccinated and boosted twice, I’m beginning to think it was a fraud too.
Fully vaccinated people are still getting covid at a higher rate than unvaccinated people and they’re also getting sicker.
Remember we were told they getting vaccinated that you would not get it and you could not spread it? Now we’re hearing about these permanent side effects that people that got the vaccination are suffering from.That was all a lie. Initially we were told that there was nothing to worry about and we didn’t need to wear masks. And then all of our lockdowns were supposed to extinguish the virus but it did not. Forgive me for becoming very pessimistic about it all.
The structural contours of the proposed mandate are problematic. For the reasons briefly discussed below, public health policy measures exceed the BART Board’s statutory remit, thus nullifying the mandate’s validity.
The sole enforcement mechanism for refusal to comply, however, is ejection from BART at the discretion of armed BART PD officers. Ejection cannot be timely challenged in court because it’s a done deal once effected. Absent a case in controversy, one lacks standing to petition the court to nullify an unlawful statute or regulation.
As such, the only way to challenge the mandate will be to refuse an armed officer’s ejection order. (We saw how that played out at Fruitvale Station in 2009; now THAT’S what I call a “trigger warning!” But I digress….) Refusal to comply with an armed officer’s order subjects one to arrest, by force if an officer deems necessary (or just feels sadistic, or is a racist, or a bully, or whatever) and prosecution for a misdemeanor. Now, I would not expect any DA to waste her time with such nonsense, particularly when the underlying conduct (refusal to comply with a legally dubious mask mandate) is void on its face. Would I bet my freedom, livelihood (it’s difficult to hold a decent job at a reputable employer with an arrest record and nearly impossible with a misdemeanor conviction) or personal safety on it? Not a chance.
So why is the mandate unlawful?
The SF BART Act (Cal. Public Utilities Code s 28500, et seq.) delegates limited rule making authority to the Board. The encumbered powers codified at sections 28950, et seq. and 30270, et seq. do not include public health interventions. This omission, ipso facto, nullifies the proposed mask mandate as a matter of law.
Unfortunately, these pernicious social climbers have devised a mechanism that immunizes their overreach from the disinfecting sunlight of judicial recourse. A right without a remedy is no right at all,
Well said, Lamorinda Larry! I enjoyed reading your commentary.
Thank you, @Sancho Panza.
Hopefully you still enjoy it knowing that I’m a lifelong centrist liberal and registered Democrat. This isn’t a partisan issue. This is a constitutional issue. The BART Board’s proposal criminalizes dissent and insulted the Directors from the legal consequences of their unconstitutional proposal.
If the BART PD resorts to lethal force to enforce this unlawful and factually dubious mandate, the Directors who supported it — even by abstaining — will have blood on their hands.
Au contraire, Lamorinda Larry…I’ve enjoyed your commentary even more knowing your political affiliation and that public discourse and free exchange of ideas is the lifeblood of America…”the way to defeat bad ideas is by exposure, argument, and persuasion, not by trying to silence.” You are correct, this is not a partisan issue.
Good. I wear my mask on BART, in stores and on airplanes.
The problem is that people won’t cooperate, so the spread of the virus will continue.
@concord Guy – Alameda County imposed an indoor mask mandate effective June 3.
Contra Costa County did not.
If mask mandates reduced the spread of the virus, you’d expect a higher case rate in Contra Costa County than in Alameda County. That’s not what happened. The new case rate (per 100k) since Alameda County imposed a mask mandate is nearly identical.
https://covidactnow.org/share/62602/?redirectTo=%2Fexplore%2F62602
@concord Guy – BART imposed a mask mandate on April 28. No transit agency in the South Bay (eg, VTA, Cal Train) imposed a mask mandate since that date. If public transit mask mandates worked, you’d expect the SF metro area to have a lower case rate than the San Jose metro area. That’s not what happened. The two adjacent metos’ respective case rates were nearly identical.
How can you contend that mask mandates help reduce the spread of the virus?
https://covidactnow.org/share/62603/?redirectTo=%2Fexplore%2F62603