logo
Here's why BART shut down for hours, and why it has people thinking about the agency's future

Here's why BART shut down for hours, and why it has people thinking about the agency's future

BART had barely restored service, after an hours-long meltdown on Friday, when the politics and damage control began.
'The temporary outage provided a window into what life in the Bay Area will be like without robust BART service,' state Senators Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco, and Jesse Arreguin, D-Berkeley, said in a joint statement to convey the urgency of funding transit. Like other agencies, BART will soon face a deficit of up to $400 million a year, which would almost certainly send the rail system into a death spiral.
But as civic leaders touted the importance of BART, officials at the agency scrambled to reassure the public that their infrastructure is not about to break down. A decade-long project to install a new train control system is currently underway. Engineers say that once it's complete, BART could vastly increase its capacity and become more reliable.
Besides, they say, Friday was an isolated malfunction that no one could have predicted.
Staff at BART, and their political allies, have a somewhat complex message for the public, a dance of eliciting empathy and managing image. BART needs money, but it's not deteriorating. Major revitalization is just around the corner. The service freeze on Friday was an outlier. Spokespeople described the 'root cause' of the outage as minute and specific, akin to a tiny flaw on a piece of connective tissue.
They explained in a statement that two network devices were intermittently failing to communicate. As a result, engineers at the Operations Control Center 'lacked the visibility of the track circuits and the train positions necessary for safe operations.'
When BART engineers detected the glitch on what they said was a 'redundant' section of the network, they disconnected it, enabling passenger service to restart.
Think of it as a large-scale version of your Internet router crashing.
'Everything has to be working perfectly,' for trains to run smoothly and deliver 170,000 commuters throughout the Bay Area, spokesperson Alicia Trost said.
How the public will receive that message depends, in part, on whether BART commuters have memory-holed an uncannily similar outage that occurred in 2019. In that instance, a network switch broke, halting trains for hours on a Saturday morning. At the time, the agency's general manager of operations promised a suite of upgrades to prevent a repeat. Over the next five years BART overhauled its computer hardware and software. The agency also used federal funding to build a network disaster recovery data center.
'Lessons learned' from the 2019 episode helped quickly resolve the situation on Friday, BART spokesperson Alicia Trost said.
Yet the real technology fix — a modern control system to update the 1960s equipment at BART's core — might reach the finish line just as the rail agency enters a financial crisis. The transit agency anticipates a funding gap of $300 to $400 million a year once federal and state emergency funding runs out. It could translate into service cuts so deep that BART would close stations and only run trains once an hour.
If that happens, it would undercut the restoration work that's finally begun, after years of planning and discussion.
Officials at the transit agency acknowledged that quandary as they conducted a post-mortem Friday afternoon, by which point trains were running throughout the Bay Area. Transit activists, meanwhile, gathered at a freeway off-ramp in San Francisco to protest what they see as a dearth of funding, 'which leads directly to the sort of outages BART had this morning,' said one of the organizers, Cyrus Hall.
'This was really a snap decision,' Hall said, adding that he had planned to go rock climbing when a friend called to say BART was out and it was time to make a point.
'We made the signs,' Hall said, 'and we rushed downtown.'
Wiener and Arreguin are pressing for a transit sales tax measure next year that would also include some accountability measures for the agencies. The idea is to deliver consistent service and build public trust. Hours-long breakdowns will neither be routine, nor expected.
'I want to understand what caused (the breakdown), but I also want to understand what does getting around the Bay Area look like without BART,' Wright said. 'Because that's a real question we're having to contend with in the coming year.'
In that sense, Friday served as a harbinger.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Harvard gets new legal backing from 5 Ivies and over 12,000 alumni
Harvard gets new legal backing from 5 Ivies and over 12,000 alumni

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Harvard gets new legal backing from 5 Ivies and over 12,000 alumni

Twenty four universities, including five Ivy League schools, and more than 12,000 alumni took measures to back Harvard University in its legal battle against the Trump administration, which has threatened it with slashing billions of dollars in grants. Princeton, Yale, Dartmouth, Brown and the University of Pennsylvania, along with several other schools, filed an amicus brief on Monday in support of the nation's oldest university, arguing that the funding freeze would impact more than just Harvard, due to the interconnectedness of scientific research, and would ultimately hinder American innovation and economic growth. Also on Monday, the group of 12,041 Harvard alumni filed a separate brief describing the withholding of funds as a 'reckless and unlawful' attempt to assert control over the school and other higher education institutions. 'The escalating campaign against Harvard threatens the very foundation of who we are as a nation,' the alumni said in the brief. 'We embrace our responsibility to stand up for our freedoms and values, to safeguard liberty and democracy, and to serve as bulwarks against these threats to the safety and well-being of all.' The amicus briefs aim to provide expertise or insight to the court, but the schools and individuals are not parties in the lawsuit itself. Harvard in April rejected the government's list of 10 demands, including auditing viewpoints of the student body, a move the administration says is aimed at addressing antisemitism on campus. After the government threatened to freeze $2.2 billion in multiyear grants and $60 million 'in multi-year contract value,' Harvard hit back with a lawsuit. The brief filed by the universities included other prominent institutions like Georgetown, Johns Hopkins and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. The only Ivy League schools missing were Cornell and Columbia universities. The schools argued that the partnership between the government and academia has long led to critical advancements, from the The Human Genome Project to the Covid-19 vaccine. And that funding cuts to one school could endanger research at others. Harvard, MIT and Princeton, for example, have received funding from the National Institutes of Health for a project that could potentially yield tools to treat Alzheimer's disease. 'The work cannot continue at individual sites; MIT cannot use machine learning to uncover patterns, for example, without data from Princeton and Harvard,' the brief said. The universities said in the brief that the cuts would only cause more harm to the United States' ability to compete in science and academia. 'These cuts to research funding risk a future where the next pathbreaking innovation — whether it is a cure for cancer or Alzheimer's, a military technology, or the next Internet — is discovered beyond our shores, if at all,' the brief said. Sally Kornbluth, president of MIT, said in a letter to the school's community that it was critical to make a legal argument against the funding cuts. 'Although the value to the public of federally funded university research feels obvious to us at MIT, we felt compelled to make the case for its countless benefits to the court and, in effect, to the American people,' Kornbluth said. The Harvard alumni filed their brief in support of the school's motion for a summary judgement submitted last week. If granted, the summary judgment would allow the court to decide the case without a full trial. The alumni, which include comedian Conan O'Brien, author Margaret E. Atwood and Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., wrote in the brief that the administration's 'end goal is to narrow our freedoms to learn, teach, think, and act, and to claim for itself the right to dictate who may enjoy those freedoms.' The alumni also slammed the administration's concerns over antisemitism as rationale over the funding freeze. 'We unequivocally condemn antisemitism and every other form of discrimination and hate, which have no place at Harvard or anywhere else in our society,' the alumni said in its brief. 'Yet charges of antisemitism — particularly without due process and proper bases and findings by the Government — should not be used as a pretext for the illegal and unconstitutional punishment and takeover of an academic institution by the Government.' The government's demands on Harvard, the alumni said in the brief, 'have little or nothing to do with combating antisemitism' or any other form of discrimination on campus. 'Rather, its demands stifle the very engagement, teaching, and research that bring communities together, heighten our understanding of one another, and advance solutions that directly benefit us all,' the brief said. The show of legal support comes amid a monthslong back-and-forth between the administration and Harvard University. Most recently, the school sued the administration after Trump issued a proclamation last week denying visas for foreign students trying to come to the U.S. to attend the prestigious school. This article was originally published on

Steve Bannon says Trump should launch an investigation into Musk for alleged drug use
Steve Bannon says Trump should launch an investigation into Musk for alleged drug use

Yahoo

time4 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Steve Bannon says Trump should launch an investigation into Musk for alleged drug use

Former White House advisor Steve Bannon is urging President Donald Trump's administration to launch a special counsel investigation into Elon Musk – including looking at his alleged drug use. 'I think the best way to do it is as a special counsel that can kind of oversee everything. Pull the security clearance for the drugs, temporarily, investigate the whole drug situation,' Bannon told former Meet The Press host Chuck Todd on his new streaming show, 'Sunday Night With Chuck Todd.' Bannon, referencing a New York Times report that detailed the billionaire CEO's alleged drug use leading up to the 2024 election. Musk allegedly was using ecstasy, psychedelic mushrooms, Adderall and so much ketamine that it caused him bladder issues. He denied the report when asked about it during his final day as a 'special government employee' under Trump. Todd noted that Musk, 'never would have passed a security clearance as just a mid-level staffer,' to which Bannon agreed, saying, 'Zero.' 'Given what the drug use that was on the record,' Todd added. Bannon and Todd went on to discuss Musk's alleged altercation with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent in the White House, which Bannon told the Washington Post before the story made international headlines. During the conversation, Bannon claimed that Musk was rumored to be 'micro-dosing' before the fight, according to Mediaite. The apparent fight included Bessent repeatedly shouting 'F*** you!' at Musk within earshot of Trump in the Oval Office. Bannon, a longtime critic of Musk, argued before the fiery fallout between Trump and Musk last week that the billionaire tech mogul does not have the president's best interests in mind. The friendship between two of the world's most powerful men came to a crashing halt last week as Musk disagreed with Trump about his spending bill and the two shared a very public Internet feud. Meanwhile, Trump claimed Elon was 'wearing thin' and he asked him to leave. Musk, for his part, brought bombshell claims to X that Trump is in the 'Epstein files.'

US Public Transit Systems See Ratings Hit as Fiscal Woes Mount
US Public Transit Systems See Ratings Hit as Fiscal Woes Mount

Bloomberg

time7 hours ago

  • Bloomberg

US Public Transit Systems See Ratings Hit as Fiscal Woes Mount

US mass-transit agencies are already grappling with weak ridership numbers and evaporating pandemic aid. Now, their credit ratings are under pressure. The San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District was the latest to take a hit when it lost its Aaa rating from Moody's Ratings last week. The system's operations depend heavily on fares, and the dip in daily usage — which has not recovered to pre-pandemic levels — has ballooned its projected budget deficit to as much as $400 million in the upcoming fiscal years.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store