I avoid BART as much as possible because of the filth and crazy people. Often the escalators are broken because they're clogged with human feces.[1] And that's just with homeless people sleeping outside the stations or on the cars while BART is operating. It would be far worse if they slept in the stations overnight.

So yes, I'm willing to tell some homeless people to go to a shelter (of which there are plenty in the city) rather than ruin a transit system used by half a million commuters.

1. https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Human-waste-shuts-dow...

It only takes one person reeking of urine to make a whole train car a vile place to spend any time. So yes.

if there are so many people with problems that this happens often, your city has much more important problems to solve(helping those people) than "nice transit" (my city & most cities have to do this as well tho .. i am probably hypocritical in this)

We are not going to solve the problem of democratic governance by a majority-homeowner electorate. To the extent that a homeowner electorate would ever allow homelessness to be solved:

- Can't solve homelessness without mass affordability.

- Can't have mass affordability without density.

- Can't have density when voters are worried about congestion and parking impacts of development.

- Can't stop worrying about congestion and parking impacts of development when you drive everywhere.

- Won't stop driving everywhere until transit is attractive.

Homelesness and repulsive transit are a feedback loop. We have to break it somewhere. Fare enforcement is a lever we actually have.