The idea that hobo feces are responsible for BART's escalator problems is really an urban legend. It's the design of the damned thing, combined with statutorily mandated low-bid contracting that keeps them broken. At BART's brand-new Warm Springs station the escalators are all under roofs and there are no homeless people anywhere, and the escalators (which I must again stress are completely new) are constantly out of service. This is despite the fact that nobody uses this station, which sees less than one tenth the passenger traffic as does Embarcadero.
“When work crews pulled open a broken BART escalator at San Francisco's Civic Center Station last month, they found so much human excrement in its works they had to call a hazardous-materials team.“ (July, 2012)
https://m.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-down-...
On the other hand although the following article mentions human waste multiple times, it seems likely the largest factor is age:
“The escalators had once been very reliable but are now showing their age, Lemon said. The Dublin/Pleasanton escalator, on the job since 1997, and the Millbrae escalator, in service since 2003, are both closing in on 20 years, which means it’s time for an overhaul, Lemon said.“
I'm not denying the fact that the homeless crap on the BART stations. What I'm saying, and what the data from the new stations proves, is that it's not a factor and neither is age, nor exposure to rain. The new ones in the middle of nowhere with no rain are still unreliable, and there's no significant difference in available between the paid area and street escalators which you would expect to be different if transient excrement was the cause.
The article [1] seems to provide data that disagrees, that the affected escalators have higher failure rates. What do you think is the motivation for these experts providing incorrect information?
That analysis commits a variety of errors. For example, they rank Warm Springs as the most reliable with “only” 5 days of downtime in the last two years. Unfortunately at that time the station had only been open for 60 days.
At what point do you just station an officer nearby, lying in wait, that will arrest that person on the spot? There has to be some criminal law against this. And as there is not an infinite supply of shit-smearing persons, it would stop soon.
Why assume people are just shit-smearing for "shit and giggles"? As far as I understand it, it's mostly homeless people who end up "doing their business there", due to a lack of better options.
Just fining them, when they ain't got a whole lot of alternatives, sounds like a rather mean, and inefficient, thing to do. They probably can't pay the fine anyway, but they still gonna have the very same bodily urges. So that whole exercise would only have generated some useless bureaucracy, without actually having changed anything about the problem.
A much smarter solution would be to offer homeless people an actual place to do their business, instead of trying to "police away" fundamental societal problems like poverty and homelessness.
Like if there were a public restroom near that area. It's at a subway terminal, I'm sure other people have "needs" as well. And if a homeless person needs to take a private crap, well, all the better.
The problem with "public restrooms" that have been tried in california is that they just turn into heroin dens and places for prostitutes to do their business. It's a difficult problem that has seen the occasional actual attempt at a solution
