Road Warrior

The in basket: Back in October, a commenter on the Road Warrior blog had this to ask after reading a column that said the cell phone and texting laws that had made violations a primary offense a few months earlier didn’t apply on private property:

“How about enforcing cell phone use on the docks while loading the boats?” asked the commenter, identified only as Red.

“People complain that the boats aren’t leaving on time…Well, when someone is on the phone and not paying attention, this slows down the loading process…and it is my understanding the docks are public property not private.”

As I mulled over his question, it occurred to me that the answer might vary depending on whether the car was moving, momentarily still during loading or had its motor turned off while its driver waited for a ferry. Further, the same distinctions would apply in the shoulder holding areas outside the terminals at Bainbridge Island, Kingston and elsewhere.

I asked how the law would be applied in such situations.

The out basket: Trooper Krista Hedstrom of the State Patrol office here says that despite wording in both laws specifying that they apply to “moving motor vehicles,” WSP’s position is that being stopped momentarily, such as at a stop light, does not allow a driver to text or hold a cell phone to the ear briefly.

And the same philosophy would apply in a ferry holding area. “When stopped in a holding lane at the ferry you are still technically on a state route and can be issued a ticket for use of a cell phone.  However, I would be surprised if I heard of troopers ticketing drivers while in a holding lane. This applies to those areas inside and outside of the terminal. This is really where common sense needs to come into play.”

I took it one step further and asked if texting while actually on the ferry crossing the Sound might get a person cited and she said simply, “No. That would be ridiculous.”

Lastly, I asked if WSP would seek amendment of the two laws to remove the “moving” wording and she said the agency has no such intention.

The out basket: My wife regularly reports to me when we pass a driver with a cell phone to his or her ear, so I’m sure the law is routinely violated. I don’t see if myself very often, as looking to my right for more than a glance while I’m at the wheel is chancy.

I asked the three largest law enforcement offices here for some figures for cell phone and texting citations since they became primary offenses that can be ticketed without an underlying infraction last June.

Deputy Scott Wilson of the Kitsap County Sheriff’s Office says KCSO’s deputies have issued 196 tickets since June 1 for having a cell phone to the driver’s ear, and six for texting.

Lt. Pete Fisher of Bremerton police traffic division says his officers have written 144 cell phone citations and two texting tickets, nearly all during two emphasis patrols in June and July.

And Trooper Krista Hedstrom of the Bremerton State Patrol office, says its troopers have stopped 296 drivers for cell phone use (132 tickets issued) and 14 for texting (6 tickets issued).  ”The decision to issue a ticket is entirely at the officers discretion,” she added.

None of the three said so, but I must assume the comparatively few texting citations, despite the greater danger texting represents, can be attributed to the greater ability to carry it on out of sight of a passing car, compared to having a cell phone at one’s ear.

Scott Wilson adds, “Sheriff’s deputies are well aware of what’s occurring out there with certain drivers who seem to disregard these more recent laws, in total.  Patrol / traffic deputies can’t be everywhere.

“A number of drivers will ‘get away with it’ probably many, many times.  The one time they will wish that they had paid attention will be when they are the ‘at fault’ driver in a motor vehicle collision due to their failure to comply with the law.”

.

The in basket: Kathryn Simpson wonders about the applicability to bicyclists of the ban on cell phone and texting while driving.

The in basket: A reader who wants to be known only as Lonnie for purposes of this column says he saw a Kitsap Transit bus driver flip open his cell phone and begin talking as he drove the bus at 11th and Perry in East Bremerton one recent morning.

He wonders if bus drivers are among those exempted from the hands-free device law, along with police, emergency personnel, tow truck drivers and anyone reporting a crime or an emergency. He’d find that curious, he said, “especially with such a huge vehicle.”

The out basket: Actually Kitsap Transit bus drivers are more limited in their use of cell phones than any of us, as a company policy forbids all use of a cell phone while the bus is in motion, says John Clauson, Transit’s service development manager.

That policy, which could stand a little editing to settle on the correct pronouns,  reads, “”Operator’s personal cellular phones are not to be used while aboard a coach to communicate with Dispatch or any other parties. Personal cell phone use is only allowed at terminals or transfer centers when your coach is parked, while they are off the bus and only if its use doesn’t interfere with their job duties. If it is necessary to call Dispatch while you are in service either because you are in a “dead radio zone” or because your radio is not working, the operator must stop their coach and secure it before using their cellular phone.

The driver of the bus Lonnie saw will be pointedly reminded of that policy, John said.

By coincidence, the hands-free law was amended this year to address a transit issue, but not to add transit drivers to the list of those exempted from the cell-phone prohibition.

Instead, it allows a bus driver to hold a receiver to his or her ear if it’s parts of a device permanently affixed to the vehicle. John says that describes the radio units in many of Kitsap Transit’s buses, which have telephone-like handsets wired to the radio. Because the radio system itself is wireless, even though the handset isn’t, transit officials statewide worried when the hands-free law made it a primary offense that it would prevent drivers from using those radios. So they got the law changed.

The in basket: Duane, who didn’t provide his last name, said in an e-mail that he was reminded by a story about a woman killed while talking on her cell phone while driving that “a few weeks ago I passed a Kitsap County sheriff in uniform in a fully marked county sheriff car talking on a hand-held cell phone while driving. 

“If our own county sheriffs aren’t following the laws they are supposed to enforce, how can he be expected to cite someone for the very thing he also does?” Duane asked. 

“This needs to be exposed in the media and we need much more coverage about the newest change to the cell phone law,” he said. “I still am having to avoid drivers who are talking or texting while driving on a regular basis.  And seeing a county sheriff doing so while driving really encouraged me to believe the law will be enforced!”

The out basket: If a cell phone user has somehow not learned of the toughening of the state law, making texting and holding a cell phone to one’s ear while driving a primary offense citable without any accompanying driving infraction, I doubt that mention here will reach that person. But consider it mentioned. It’s effective June 10.

Police are exempt from the law, as are ambulance drivers, tow truck operators, other emergency vehicles and the average citizen when reporting an emergency or crime.

Nonetheless, police departments can require compliance with the law by its officers as a matter of policy. As Kitsap Sun Crime and Courts reporter Josh Farley reported on his blog and in the paper in April, the State Patrol has done so, and Kitsap County Sheriff’s Office is considering it. 

But I’m sure there are exceptions that will cause complaints like Duane’s. For example, cell phone communications are more secure than radio communications, so will be preferable under certain circumstances.

The KCSO spokesman said the department patrol cars have been equipped with hands-free devices that are “crystal clear,” to encourage doing what the law requires of others.

I hope they’re that good. I’ve had routine problems sending and receiving calls on the two hands-free devices I’ve owned, whether reception-related or caused by my flawed understanding of the device. 

I’m going to experiment with using the speakerphone feature on my cell phone and just having it in my lap during conversations to see how that works as an alternative. If the phone isn’t held to your ear, and you’re not texting, you’re legal.

The in basket: Lisa Rossi e-mails to say, “Several times while driving to Silverdale from Poulsbo (and back) I have seen a couple of cars pulled off to the side of the road not blocking traffic. The drivers were talking on the cell phone and shortly thereafter, police, either county or state patrol, pulled in behind them.

“The cell phone talker doesn’t have flashers on so they aren’t in distress. Why would an officer stop? Are the (drivers) illegally parked or stopped? Is it still illegal to talk on your cell phone in your car even if you are safely on the side of the road?”

The in basket: More than likely, the officers were making a courtesy stop to see if the driver was having trouble, but there are places where it would be illegal to use the shoulder for that purpose. And the State Patrol encourages use of a safer place than the shoulder.

“If a trooper sees a vehicle stopped along the shoulder,” says WSP information officer Krista Hedstrom, “they will stop (if not in route to another call) and check on the driver to make sure they are OK. Many times, drivers with disabled vehicles don’t turn their flashers on when they are stopped.  Sometimes they can’t because their battery is dead. 

 ”There is nothing in (state law) that says you cannot stop along the side of the road to take a call,” Krista said. ”Keeping this in mind, Highway 3 is a limited access highway and we (don’t like to see) drivers lined up on the side of the road talking on their cell.  We encourage drivers who must make a call to take the nearest exit and find a place where they are safely off the roadway. 

“It is my belief that stopping on the shoulder of Highway 3 where cars are passing you at 60-plus MPH is not the safest alternative. It also poses a huge hazard when attempting to pull back onto the roadway after the call is complete.   

“If a driver on the phone is contacted on the shoulder, more than likely that trooper will ask them to move to a safer location,” she said.

But if the driver has pulled over just to use his or her phone in one of those no-shoulder-parking zones, such as the one established by a sign on Highway 3 in Gorst for a few miles to the north, “a ticket could be issued, at the troopers discretion,” Krista said.

The in basket: A reader who doesn’t want to have his name used out of fear the authorities will get mad at him says he has noticed numerous law enforcement officers using their cell phones held to their ears as they drive. He wonders if they are exempt from the hands-free law.

The out basket: Yes, say Bremerton police Lt. Pete Fisher and Trooper Krista Hedstrom. The law (RCW 46.61.667) specifically exempts emergency vehicles, which, of course, includes police cars. Police use of in-car communications such as emergency radios predates cell phones by decades, anyway.

The law also specifically exempts tow truck drivers en route to a disabled vehicle, drivers wearing hearing aids and everyone else if they are reporting illegal activity, summoning medical or other emergency help or preventing injury to a person or property.
Pete said BPD officers are directed in department policies to use due care and caution in operating their cars. 

Krista said, “Chief Batiste has been clear that he wants troopers to set a good example, by limiting their use of cell phones while driving. 

“The WSP has provided hands-free devices to any employee who is assigned

a State Patrol cell phone and who requests it,” she added. 

“With that being said, there are probably more times than the public

realizes when a cell phone is an appropriate tool for the responding

trooper or supervisor,” she said.

“Bomb threats come immediately to mind, but there are other situations where the information shouldn’t go over a system

that can be monitored by anyone with a scanner.  

“Citizens are allowed to use the cell phone to report emergencies -  just as a trooper might use a

cell phone to coordinate the response.”