Six Years Later, BART Watchdog Still Lacks Clear Authority, Contra Costa Grand Jury Finds

A Contra Costa County Civil Grand Jury report warns that BART’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) still lacks a formal charter nearly six years after Bay Area voters approved the watchdog agency, creating uncertainty about its authority and independence.

The report, titled “BART Office of Inspector General: Independence Delayed Is Independence Denied,” concludes that the absence of a charter has led to disagreements over the OIG’s powers, access to information, and ability to conduct investigations without interference.

The Office of Inspector General was created as part of Regional Measure 3, a 2018 ballot measure approved by voters across the Bay Area. The office was established to identify fraud, waste, abuse, and inefficiencies within BART operations, conduct audits and investigations, and report its findings to both the public and state lawmakers.

According to the Grand Jury, the OIG has presented multiple draft charters to the BART Board of Directors since 2021, but the board has never formally adopted one. The report states that ongoing disputes involving labor unions and concerns about employee interviews have contributed to the delay.

The Grand Jury found that BART has approved a formal charter for its Internal Audit department, granting that office unrestricted access to records, data, and personnel. However, no similar written authority exists for the Inspector General’s office, despite its broader oversight role.

The report highlights a recent incident in which an investigation into alleged retaliation was paused for several months after a BART executive questioned whether the OIG had authority to investigate executive leadership without prior approval. The Grand Jury said the disagreement illustrates the risks created by the lack of clear written policies defining the Inspector General’s authority.

Investigators also found that BART’s Employee Code of Conduct does not specifically require employees to cooperate with Inspector General investigations, and collective bargaining agreements with labor unions do not contain such requirements either.

To address the issues, the Grand Jury recommended that the BART Board adopt written policies affirming the Inspector General’s authority to conduct investigations, review management responses to findings, access records and personnel, and interview any BART employee or executive without seeking prior approval. The report also urges the board to update employee conduct rules, seek cooperation requirements in future union contracts, and begin the process of adopting a formal charter for the office.

The Grand Jury concluded that while voters created the Office of Inspector General to serve as an independent watchdog over BART operations, the lack of formal protections and written authority has hindered the office’s ability to function as originally intended. The BART Board of Directors is required to respond to the report’s findings and recommendations.