Carpool NOT OK?!?

I had the most frustrating brief discussion with a motorcycle officer while in the carpool lane today... (he didn't seem to be a CHP, the markings on his uniform seemed to indicate a Sheriff motorcycle officer).

I was driving merrily along the 10 fwy carpool between the 605 and 710 this morning -- it is the section which I think is called the El Monte busway which has a minimum 3 occupancy requirement during "rush hour" traffic. I see in my rear-view a motorcycle officer who was instructing the white pickup truck with the single rider behind me to get out of the carpool lane. Awesome, I think to myself -- they're patrolling the lane as they're supposed to...

A few minutes later, he pulls up alongside me (on my right) and makes a motion for me to get out of the carpool lane as well, and says on his mounted bullhorn, "minimum three for the carpool lane, exit the lane now."

I'm flabbergasted and my adrenaline starts to pump! Can't he see my white stickers? I comply and move to the left-most lane of the regular lanes but also start rolling down my left window. The officer pulls up alongside my left window and I yell out, "but this is an all electric car!"

He reiterates, "minimum three occupants for carpool." I yell, "But I have the white sticker!"

"It doesn't matter. You need a minimum of three occupants in your electric car," he says with quite a bitter tone, "that's the law."

He then continues down the lane, and leaves me behind traffic in the regular lanes.

As I thought about it, I wished he had pulled me over to give me a citation, as then we could have debated the merits of the white sticker, but as it was, I simply re-entered the lane a few minutes later, and I never saw him again.

Has this happened to anyone? Having to explain the white sticker to law enforcement? I now have the section of the CA vehicle code (21655.9 HOV LANES USE BY ULTRA LOW EMISSION VEHICLES) printed out with the "regardless of vehicle occupancy" text highlighted. I intend to keep this in my car in case it happens to me again and I actually get pulled over.

Argh!

As far as I know he was in the wrong.

onlyjaymoo said:

I now have the section of the CA vehicle code (21655.9 HOV LANES USE BY ULTRA LOW EMISSION VEHICLES) printed out..

Click to expand...

If my sticker ever show up, I should add that to the tool kit to deal with the ignorant authoritarian. I am sorry you got that feeling of impending LEO interaction for no good reason.

Having it in the car will not matter. You will still most likely get written up.
You will then need to drag the matter in front of a Judge.

smkettner said:

Having it in the car will not matter. You will still most likely get written up.
You will then need to drag the matter in front of a Judge.

Click to expand...

What a shame. And what a complete waste of time and money. It's not like I didn't have the sticker, or that I was in violation of any other part of the VC. All of that for an "honest" mistake on the part of the LEO?

Blargh.

smkettner said:

Having it in the car will not matter. You will still most likely get written up.
You will then need to drag the matter in front of a Judge.

Click to expand...

It will be "evidence" at the trial....

"There I was, deliberately following the law, when out of nowhere came this rabid person who "claimed" to be a police officer. Even when I showed this person Exhibit A, he/she still wrote me a ticket."

TonyWilliams said:

smkettner said:

Having it in the car will not matter. You will still most likely get written up.
You will then need to drag the matter in front of a Judge.

Click to expand...

It will be "evidence" at the trial....

"There I was, deliberately following the law, when out of nowhere came this rabid person who "claimed" to be a police officer. Even when I showed this person Exhibit A, he/she still wrote me a ticket."

Click to expand...

Well, I would have allowed him to pull me over, got his badge number and patrol supervisors name. Then I would have called his patrol supervisor, maybe on my cell phone with the officer right there, and suggested that some measure of "reeducation" was necessary.

I'd want to research this a little more thoroughly first as there may be an exception to the sticker HOV lane waiver where lanes are specifically marked and used for a special purpose.

onlyjaymoo said:

A few minutes later, he pulls up alongside me (on my right) and makes a motion for me to get out of the carpool lane as well, and says on his mounted bullhorn, "minimum three for the carpool lane, exit the lane now."

Click to expand...

Take a printout of the white sticker law and keep it in the car. Show it to the cop explaining it was a "recent change" ...

Call the local CHP or Sherriff's office (if you can figure out who it was) and complain about the encounter. It might help get the word out to the local enforcement...either that or they will explain why you CAN'T drive solo in that particular lane.

mogur said:

I'd want to research this a little more thoroughly first as there may be an exception to the sticker HOV lane waiver where lanes are specifically marked and used for a special purpose.

onlyjaymoo said:

A few minutes later, he pulls up alongside me (on my right) and makes a motion for me to get out of the carpool lane as well, and says on his mounted bullhorn, "minimum three for the carpool lane, exit the lane now."

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

This is why I posted -- besides the obvious sympathy ploy, does anyone know if there are currently any exceptions to the white sticker? The code allows for "local authorities" to suspend the privileges based on a variety of factors, but only two of them have anything to do with criteria other than the repeal of the VC or not having valid decals displayed, etc...

The first is: The lane exceeds a level of service C, as described in subdivision (b) of Section 65089 of the Government Code
The second is: The operation or projected operation of vehicles in the lane will significantly increase congestion

I would expect that if either of the above is true:

1) something that denotes this exception is placed on the carpool sign indicating that it is not part of the program
2) the LEO would indicate that despite the white sticker, there is currently an exception to the VC in play for that carpool lane and that is the reason for the violation...

Without both 1) and 2), how could a reasonable person be expected to know that such an exception was in play?

davewill said:

Call the local CHP or Sherriff's office (if you can figure out who it was) and complain about the encounter. It might help get the word out to the local enforcement...either that or they will explain why you CAN'T drive solo in that particular lane.

Click to expand...

Good point. I'll do that today and post any results...

davewill said:

Call the local CHP or Sherriff's office (if you can figure out who it was) and complain about the encounter. It might help get the word out to the local enforcement...either that or they will explain why you CAN'T drive solo in that particular lane.

Click to expand...

I would suggest getting clarification on the law and how it applies on that specific section of roadway rather than a complaint.

onlyjaymoo said:

I was driving merrily along the 10 fwy carpool between the 605 and 710 this morning -- it is the section which I think is called the El Monte busway which has a minimum 3 occupancy requirement during "rush hour" traffic...

Click to expand...

It even has a Wikipedia entry:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Monte_Busway

...Conversion to High occupancy toll lanes
The bus/HOV lanes will be converted to high occupancy toll (HOT) lanes as part of the Metro ExpressLanes project.[6] Sole drivers will be able to use the toll lanes on payment of a fee which will vary dynamically with traffic levels. Vehicles with 2 occupants will charged a dynamic fee during peak hours but not at other times. Vehicles with 3 or more people will be able to use the lanes without charge at all times...

Click to expand...

http://www.metro.net/projects/expresslanes/

Seems like that section may be a somewhat "atypical" set of carpool lanes.

http://rctc.org/carpoolfaq.asp

...Always check posted signs. Southland carpool lanes require at least two people in a car, except the El Monte Busway, which requires three during peak hours (6-9 a.m. and 4-7 p.m.)...

Click to expand...

http://smart.commutedate.com/busway.html

...The El Monte Busway is a special freeway lane from Downtown LA to El Monte on I-10 (San Bernardino Freeway) built for buses. Carpools are allowed to use it with the following rules:
Mon-Fri AM rush (6-9 AM) and PM rush (4-7 PM): 3 or more passengers only.
All other times: 2 or more passengers only.
In 2000, a demonstration project started by State Senator Hilda Solis reduced that number to 2 and made it a regular carpool lane... This caused MASSIVE CONGESTION...
{from Wikipedia} As a result of the increased congestion an emergency measure (Bill 769) was passed in July 2000 to terminate the experiment during peak hours raising the occupancy required to three occupants or more between the hours of 5 a.m. and 9 a.m. and from 4 p.m. to 7 p.m. Monday through Friday, in both directions.

Click to expand...

So, it looks like there was a time when it was made into a "regular carpool lane", but it caused traffic problems, so they made it a "special freeway lane" which seems to have rules that may override the regular carpool sticker function. Like with waived fees for bridge tolls, there are some places where the function of the white stickers isn't interpreted the same way by all.

I guess the question is, does AB769 override the regular carpool sticker rules?
http://beta.metro.net/projects/hov/hov_news/

@TEG,

The same wikipedia entry (not that wikipedia can be depended on for legal interpretation) has the following:

Motorcycles, clean fueled vehicles, hybrid vehicles (with the appropriate sticker), and buses (with or without passengers) are allowed on the busway at all times.

Click to expand...

This was my experience when I drove my stickered Prius, and I haven't heard/seen anything to the contrary that has changed the rules for this lane.

Called the Sheriff's department's Transit Services Bureau @ 323-563-5000

Spoke with a deputy who told me that I should have been allowed to ride the lane with the white alternative fuel sticker at any time with no occupancy requirement.

Ah, the wonders of bureaucracy. Well fortunately there wasn't 'shoot on site' policy active at the time.

I'm more stunned that the LEO didn't take the opportunity to use you and the white pickup to generate some additional revenue for the department by (trying to) writing you a ticket and generally hassling you and lecturing you. Around where I live, I haven't seem them pass up those chances in years!

IMHO it is never a good idea to challenge a Police Officer unless absolutely necessary. If I was asked to vacate a lane (any lane) by an officer I would do so. It's not the end of the world. If I was then pulled over I would ask for clarification of what I did wrong. A reasonable thing to do tactfully. If it just does not make sense AND I got a ticket then I would make a mental note of the Officers name badge number and research the law in detail. Then leave it up to a judge to decide. Remember, many officers are very stressed out and will write a flimsy ticket just to trip you up and waste an afternoon of your time. If you let them be in control of the situation and comply it is often a non event. And if it all goes bad, well THEY were the one in control and therefore responsible.

LakeLeaf said:

I'm more stunned that the LEO didn't take the opportunity to use you and the white pickup to generate some additional revenue for the department by (trying to) writing you a ticket and generally hassling you and lecturing you. Around where I live, I haven't seem them pass up those chances in years!

Click to expand...

It's difficult and dangerous to pull people over on a crowded freeway. Also, usually only the CHP actively patrols them. The deputy probably didn't want to be bothered writing difficult tickets that didn't fall under his usual area. Depending on location, the revenue might not even accrue to his locality anyway.