Breaking: Muni Alters Policy in Wake of Bus with Missing Safety Equipment Killing Cyclist

This television footage reveals that the bus which killed Cheng Jin Lai was missing its "S-1 Gard" safety device -- which should have been mounted in front of the back right tire
On Monday, SF Weekly broke the story that the bus which last week crushed 78-year-old cyclist Cheng Jin Lai was missing a key piece of safety equipment specifically designed to keep buses from crushing people.

Bus No. 8410 was not equipped with an "S-1 Gard," a hunk of polyurethane mounted in front of a bus' back-right tire to deflect people, animals, and objects from the wheel.

This paper's article triggered Muni director Ed Reiskin's call for a fleetwide bus inspection

Of 801 buses, Muni claims 14 were rolling around the city without S-1 Gards.

While this was a violation of Muni's internal policy, there were no written prohibitions against taking a bus into service sans an S-1 Gard. That changed today via a fiery Muni memo:

"We need to verify at every 1k, 1.5k, and 6k that each bus has an s1 guard, we have stock, we can order more so chk inventory (sic) and refill the shelf," reads the e-mail to Muni brass penned at 6 this morning by Neal Popp, Muni's chief mechanical officer.

"A bus will be grounded and is OOS [out of service] until it has a guard, don't run out [of the part] but if you do the bus is on hold and not to be in revenue service until repaired, NO exceptions, NONE. Safety is paramount, expect and insist on it."

That memo conforms to "the rules of maintenance" espoused by Muni's longtime former maintenance controller Virgil Dennis: "If you put something of a safety nature on a bus, you have to maintain it. If it's not on all the buses, what good does that do? Now it's a crapshoot whether you'll go under the wheel."

And, despite alarmingly stacked odds, it's a crapshoot that Cheng Jin Lai lost.

My Voice Nation Help

Jason Grant Garza here ... wow, MUNI is changing its policy ... so COULD the policy NOT be WORKING and WHY would this be UNUSUAL for San Francisco City Agencies? " While this was a violation of Muni's internal policy, there were no written prohibitions against taking a bus into service sans an S-1 Gard. That changed today via a fiery Muni memo: "

Wow, wpnderful ... does that MEAN that policies are good or follow the LAW? Would you believe NO ...  is it just like teh Sheriff POLICY not to ADVOCATE for ADA/Disability ...  or better yet the FACT that SFPD has NO POLICIES in regard to its OWN video cameras in the POLICE STATIONS ...  

Better YET San Francisco General Hospital policy to deny me my own MEDICAL RECORDS while I have forfilled required law in requesting them?  ... it seems as if their policy has ONCE again VIOLATED my rights and the LAW ; but as you can see THERE is NO CONSEQUENCE. 

Now look at the videos in regard to the Office of Citizen's Complaints, the Mayor's Office on Disability,  the Human Rights Commission?, the  City Attorney, the DA, the Sheriff, DPH, the Chief of Police and teh Police Commission. , etc. Note HOW policy circumvents the LAW.

Keep DRINKING the KOOL-AID ... oh, did you NOTE the policy at SF General over the dead woman's healthcare, missing and Sheriff's investigations (4) ????

What about the city's policy to lie and commit fraud in FEDERAL COURT (C02-3485PJH) and when BUSTED not EXPLAIN?

So am I surprised that policy violates the LAW ... NO, that is the WAY they set it up.


aliasetc topcommenter

Finally the power of the press...time for it to work on the elected jerks who don't work for the people that elected them. Good job!


Wait! So someone has to die for Bart can change there Policy?


Congrats, Joe.   Your story made a positive safety change for ALL of us.

Paul Varga
Paul Varga

Or that 'stop at the red light' policy.

Frankie Griffen
Frankie Griffen

After long debate, they have changed "Run over cyclists" to "Don't run over cyclists"

Now Trending

From the Vault


©2014 SF Weekly, LP, All rights reserved.