Posts Tagged ‘ticket’

Lawyer’s Corner: RPD Says Slacklines and Hammocks Violate the Park Code, But Do They Really?

Friday, April 10th, 2015

Here you go, this was just the other day in GGP:

7J7C5075 copy

RPD calls this kind of thing “affixing items to trees” on their newish signs, but I don’t see where this language comes from, you know, in the SF Park Code.

So yeah, if you cut down a big tree to have some fun with the stump, I can see how that’d be citeable.

But I don’t see how slacklining or romantic hammocking is an automatic violation of the SF Park Code.

So, I’m saying the newish signs from RPD are incorrect.

So I’m saying that the RPD should go to the BOS to fix this sitch,

JMO

Ferguson MO, 94117 – In St. Louis County, Expired Car Registration Costs $30, But in SF It’s $117 + $117 + $117 + $117 + $117…

Friday, April 10th, 2015

Here’s St. Louis County with its $30 tickets

…and here’s San Francisco – for this ride from Oakland with tabs expired less than six months, the cost is $117 + $117 + $117 + $117 + $117:

7J7C5295 copy

Do you think the SFMTA “makes money” from issuing citations and towing cars? Should it?

Why are the tickets $117 – why shouldn’t they be $517 or 1517?

IDK.

Looks Legit! – Hey, It’s a New “AMAZON DELIVERY” Van

Wednesday, April 1st, 2015

[UPDATE: Nick Turner, an Editor employed by Bloomberg notes:

Think the green vans are groceries (Fresh) and white ones are contractors they use for Prime deliveries. Not 100% sure, though.”]

I’m a little auspicious of this one:

7J7C4622 copy

Oh, and Amazon, check out CVC 26708, Material Obstructing or Reducing Driver’s View, conveniently located after the jump. (Unless that doesn’t apply to your operation – I can’t tell if it does. But the spirit of this law certainly should apply to your operation, Amazon.)

(more…)

Is the SFMTA Now a Paramilitary Organization? Here’s a Raged-Up Sergeant Yelling at an SFMTA PCO on Sansome

Wednesday, April 1st, 2015

So, you can be a sergeant working for our inefficient SFMTA? Well that’s news to me. but see those stripes? Mmmm, I guess “Parking and Traffic” calls its supervisors sergeants, so this guy isn’t SFPD or any kind of peace officer?

Anyway, Dude on the bike here was pissed because the PCO in this Interceptor III cart told a driver to move along from a yellow zone, you know, instead of giving her a ticket:

“Why are you playing games with these people? She’s sitting there, you cite her!”

7J7C4690 copy

Now, talk about lacking situational awareness, the woman in the towaway zone merely pulled ahead a few feet and remained on the scene as this extended yellfest continued in front of all the GG Transit users waiting for the ride home north. And I was thinking, no girl, you want to clear out of here pronto.

Well, it turns out that she didn’t leave in time so she got ticketed anyway and now she owes three figures (including the $2.50 “convenience” fee) to our inefficient SFMTA. Oh well.

This is the MTA, your Money Taking Agency, in action.

The Driver of This BMW has No Fear – Goofy Looking All-Electric Car Deserves One Ticket for the Front and One for the Rear

Monday, March 30th, 2015

The driver of this ride was nowhere to be seen.

P1200274 copy

Man, that’s bold.

Wow, SFPD Enforcement Action at Oak and Masonic – Massive Number of Luxury / Electric Cars Pulled Over, Over and Over

Monday, March 23rd, 2015

Here’s what it looks like – an SFPD enforcement action, this latest one at Oak and Masonic. (Note modern-looking SFPD Kawasaki Concours 14P (which looks to me like a CHP BMW) juxtaposed with the ancient Harley Davidsons what make up most of the Motor Patrol.)

7J7C4032 copy

This action meant that every driver who commited some infraction turning left from inbound Oak onto northbound Masonic got pulled over at the Masonic Chevron.

One supposes that the new left turn arrow phase at this intersection was the instigation for the enforcement action. (Back in the day, traffic didn’t back up during the Morning Drive due to the Double Left Turn that’s no longer there, owing to concerns over ped safety, one supposes.)

All right, here’s your money shot, here’s your scene at Fell and Masonic with a brace of drivers, drivers who “know” they’re special, so fucking special, you know, your Prius hybrid drivers, your Range Rover drivers, and your new funky BMW i3 (with absurdly tall, absurdly narrow Conestoga wagon wheels) electric car drivers:

7J7C4013 copy

That was the scene I initialy came upon and this is the same area as I left. Note the all-black Mercedes Benz, Audi and Lexus. It’s not a coincidence that the drivers of all these cars got pulled over at the same time, just saying:

7J7C4056 copy

Of course, the SFPD will also pull you over if they notice you doing something wrong going the other way, but the funny thing was that the two cars I saw getting pulled over heading south on Masonic, against the current, heading towards the Financial, were normal ones, like VW Golfs. (I’ll ask you, should you ever be proud of your car? The answer is that no you shouldn’t be, because Pride Goeth Before The Painful Traffic Ticket What’s Going to End Up Costing Your Four Figures. JMO.)

Moving on, to this – peds coming up to chat up the cops to cheer them on.

7J7C4035 copy

Now I’ll tell you, I didn’t see any driver run a red during the time I was at these intersection taking photos of the enforcement action, but I was paying more attention to the cops as opposed to the drivers. And I’ll note that sometimes the traffic lights would cycle red green red green red green without anyone getting pulled over.

I’ll leave you with this, my misfocused shot of a ped giving a black power salute to the SFPD to thank them for this latest enforcement action:

7J7C4019 copy

If You Want to Park for Free on the Sidewalks of Market Street, Simply Put BART Posters in All Your Car Windows

Friday, March 20th, 2015

North, south, east, and west – the windows facing all directions had these big BART logos affixed:

20150319_094219 (1) copy

All the windows – so it’s like, oh, I’m going to park on the yellow brown brick road of Market, so time to start taping posters up?

7J7C3964 copy

So who’s this, BART or a BART contractor?

I Know the UCSF Police CAN Patrol Ashbury Street for Traffic Violations, But I Don’t Know WHY It Does So

Thursday, March 12th, 2015

There are some answers here, but this activity waaaaay off-campus still seems off-mission to me:

P1190501 copy

Dirt Bike vs. Dirtbags: The SFPD OTJ in the Golden Gate Park Panhandle

Tuesday, March 3rd, 2015

Well, actually, I don’t know what these people did to earn a citation from the SFPD and I don’t what else they’ve done lately, you know, that might have escaped notice of the popo:

7J7C3380 copy

So maybe they’re not* dirtbags IRL, IDK.

Perhaps I’ll get called for jury duty on one of these citations, and then I’ll let you know.

*The SFPD bait car program straight outta Hollywood was a bad idea, for example. I can’t imagine convicting anybody for moving an unlocked car left idling and double-parked on Divisadero, for example.

Uh Oh, the SFPD’s Vaunted “Focus on the Five” Enforcement Program Focuses on the Wrong Five

Tuesday, February 24th, 2015

Work with me here, people.

Here you go:

“Focus on the Five – Using multi-year collision data, the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD) is focusing on enforcing the five violations that are most frequently cited in collisions with people walking. The goal is to have half their traffic citations be for these five violations.”

All right, well let’s look at the stats for last year, via Heather Knight / the District 5 Diary.

And then let’s extract all the five-digit CVC section numbers cited in the official SFPD report, plus let’s also throw in a CVC number for the pedestrian who died last year after getting hit by a MUNI bus on Geary around Baker.

(And let’s ignore all the the lower-case subsections like 21950(b) and the like, treating 21950(a) and 21950(b) as the same violation, for example.)

And then lets throw all the extracted numbers into Excel for a Sorting.

And then let’s eyeball the numbers to separate them out:

Capturefsfssfggg copy

So those are your top “five violations that are most frequently cited in collisions with people walking (and bicycle riding, but I don’t think that affects the numbers too much.)

Here they are, in order of frequency:

21950

22350

21456

21954

21955

So how does that compare with this list from politicians?

“Focus on the 23 Five” campaign to target the top five causal factors of pedestrian crashes – running red lights 24 (California Vehicle Code 21453(a)), running stop signs (California Vehicle Code 22450(a)), violating pedestrian right-of-way (California Vehicle Code 21950(a)), failing to yield while 2 turning (California Vehicle Code 21801 (a), and speeding (California Vehicle Code 22350)…

See how that works? 21950 and 22350 are in there, but CVC violations on the part of pedestrians, like 21456, 21954, and 21955 have been omitted from the list.

Is the official “Focus on the Five” about pedestrian safety or “pedestrian rights?”

I’m thinking it’s about pedestrian rights, like the right to jaywalk, that kind of thing.

Is SFGov serious about SF Vision Zero 2024, a “program” that has the goal of ending all transportation deaths in San Francisco long after all the pols who voted for it have termed out?

Well, how can it be if it’s afraid to enforce traffic laws for political reasons?

If you want safety for pedestrians, wouldn’t you want them to be afraid of getting cited for jaywalking?

No? All right, well then keep on doing what you’re doing, but you’ll never ever achieve Vision Zero 2024 the way you’re going about it, SFGov.