2009 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003 2002 2001 2000 1999 1998
Mayor’s
Disability Council
|
|
Minutes
of the regular Mayor’s Disability Council meeting
held on Friday, 19 November 1999
|
MAYOR’S DISABILITY COUNCIL
MEMBERS PRESENT:
Sergio Alunan
Vincent Behan
Edward Evans
Viola Jackson
Michael Kwok
Frank Marone ( co-chair)
Susan Mizner ( co-chair)
Damien Pickering
Grayce Regan
EXCUSED ABSENT:
Claudia Center
August Longo
MAYOR’S OFFICE ON DISABILITY
STAFF:
Walter Park, Executive Director
Carolyn Snipes, Office
Manager
The meeting was called to
order at 1:15 p.m.. The agenda was read and approved.
PUBLIC COMMENTS:
Ms. Victoria Morgan, a representative
of the management committee of 1010 Valencia Street, requested help from the
MDC. She said that her group provided meeting space which was semi-accessible
for disabled members of Alcoholics Anonymous, but they were recently evicted.
she sought the assistance of the MDc in securing a new accessible location.
Her telephone number was given: (415) 641-1947.
Mr. Al Rose congratulated
Ms. susan Mizner and Dr. Frank Marone on their election to the Co-chairmanship
of the MDC. He also thanked Mr. Richard Skaff for his help on an access issue
at Mr. Rose’s apartment building. finally, he added that there was a racist
media that did not acknowledge the many accomplishments of Mayor Brown, such
as the creation and funding of the Mayor’s Office on Disability, the increase
of wages for In-Home support Service workers, and the Mayor’s general accessibility
to the public.
Ms. Elizabeth Libby said
that she was a native San Franciscan who was disgusted with the city. As a wheelchair
user, she would sometimes go down a street on a curb cut, and find out that
there was no curb cut on the other side of the street. She said that this needed
to be addressed immediately.
COMMENTS FROM THE CO-CHAIRS:
Dr. Frank Marone congratulated
Ms. Grayce REgan and Mr. Walter Park for their service as the previous Co-chairs
of the MDC. He also thanked the MDC members, and community members who supported
his election as Co-chair. He also congratulated Ms. Mizner for accepting a position
in the Mayor’s Office on Disability. He added that the public was owed the allowing
of maximun representation of viewpoints and opinions. He believed that the MDC
had not lived up to this responsibility in the past. He observed that during
the past meetings, while other members of the public were allowed to go on for
lengths of time, this opportunity was not given to other public comments when
made near the end of a meeting. He expected to enforce the timeline more strictly
to ensure that all the members of the public who wished to speak would have
the opportunity to do so. Dr. Marone added that he wished to enforce cooperation
and respect between members of the public, the disability community, and City
government. He called upon the MDC or members of the public when they had something
to say, to briefly propose some idea or solution to the issue or problems that
they have raised. He also hoped that as much as possible, that a sense of humor
be injected into the proceedings since the issues being with were sometimes
intense or contentious. He also took pleasure in the status and direction that
the MDC had taken, particularly in the work toward resolving some of the issues
brought to its attention, and looked forward to working further in this regard.
Ms. Susan Mizner said that for the December MDC meeting, the focus of the discussion
would be the mission of the MDC, and how to implement it. The draft of which
had been distributed to its members. Members of the public would be provided
with copies of the draft, and will be invited to give their comments. She said
that the thematic or single-issue type of meetings will continue, and in January,
February, and march, it was expected that there would be two of these types
of meetings per month. MDC members are expected to take the lead on issues that
they were familiar with. Ms. Mizner said that the upcoming topics for these
meetings would be public safety, issues such as police, fire, and emergency
medical support. Additionally, Recreation and Parks issues, Public Health issues,
public transportation issues, parking and traffic issues, and Children and Youth
issues. Requests and input from the public would be welcome.
REPORT FROM Staff:
Director Park gave an update
of what staff and the MDC had been working on during the past month. first,
he said that work had been in progress regarding the Self-evaluation/ Transition
plans, and Mr. Logan Hopper, one of the consultants on the project was present
and would provide an update later during the meeting. Work on the surveying
of city facilities was under way, and the Airport, the libraries, parts of the
War Memorial, and public assembly facilities have been surveyed with the rest
on the way. city Departments have been requested to identify their programs,
and surveys will be sent out to determine programmatic access. The MDC was requested
to take a lead role in providing public forums on the Self-evaluation/ Transition
Plans, particularly next January, Febraury and March, when the consultants would
still be in the information gathering stage. The consultants would like to have
public forums on different topics in different neighborhoods, in conjunction
with other disability organizations. Dr. Marone said that he hoped that these
neighborhood meetings would not require a quorum of the MDC, but would merely
be information gathering meetings. Director Park said this was correct, where
MDC members would be present, but no action would be taken, and a quorum would
not be necessary. He added that the curb ramp inventory project was very important
since it was specifically mentioned in the ADA. The Department of Public Works
will soon be undertaking this project, and staff had several meeting with DPW
staff on this matter. There was good progress at DPW in getting that work started.
The City Hall ATM was now working and talking. However, until the Y2K issue
has been cleared, one cannot check their account balance on the machine. Regarding
the Laguna Honda Hospital issue, staff had already been meeting with Department
of Public Health, City Attorney’s Office staff, and members of the disability
community. He was happy to report on the good dialog regarding the institutionalization,
and de-institutionalization of persons with disabilities and seniors at Laguna
Honda and similar San Francisco facilities. In response to Dr. Marone, Director
Park said that the Mayor’s Office on Disability actually convened the Laguna
Honda meetings and staff continue to attend these. In addition, staff had met
with Department of Parking and Traffic personnel which was also a good initial
meeting. On December 1st, Channel 54, which broadcast the MDC meetings, will
become channel 26 on December 1st. Additionally, staff had now begun to work
with the Mayor’s committee on Employment of People with Disabilities. Said committee
had been reorganized one year ago, with monthly meetings, and it recently conducted
a career fair at the Sheraton Palace Hotel on Aug. 27, which the Mayor attended.
director Park now attended these monthly meetings, and invited the MDC members
to participate. These were currently executive committee meetings that were
not open to the general public, but he was sure that the mdc members could sit-in.
Mr. Pickering said that he was the chairman of that conmmittee in 1997, and
they held quarterly breakfast meetings which were generally well attended by
people from private industry and the corporate sector, as well as persons from
the disability and employment fields. He expected Director Park to provide MDc
members notice of these meetings. REgarding the mayor’s Office on Housing, there
have been meetings with staff on the access to various affordable housing projects.
the Mayor was particularly proud that a large number of affordable housing projects
had been started or completed during this administration, and would continue
for the next four years, and staff would ensure that these would be made as
accessible as possible. REgarding the thematic meetings, he suggested that one
area that could be looked into was the City budget. There had been some previous
discussion on this subject, and while the Mayor’s Office on Disability had its
own small budget, there were other Departments with larger budgets that they
can do much with. finally, he introduced Ms. Mizner as the new Assistant Director
for Programmatic Access of the Mayor’s Office on disability. He observed that
three other MDC members had applied for the position.
Mr. Evans thanked staff
from the Department of Public Works Bureau of Street Use and Mapping for their
assistance in going out to survey and identify problem areas in sidewalks and
curb cuts located in the Tenderloin and downtown districts. He said that many
of the problems arose from the fact that some curb cuts were built on sub-sidewalk
basements, and the property owners of these basements were responsible for putting
in the curb cuts, or replacing the sidewalks because of structural defects.
He added that people have to realize that it was not just the City that was
sometimes at fault, but also the property owners responsible for these sub-sidewalk
basements.
DEPARTMENT OF PARKING AND
TRAFFIC ISSUES:
dr. Marone said that he
understood that Director Stewart sunshine of the Department of Parking and Traffic
could not attend the MDc meeting, and had sent a representative instead. Director
Park said that his staff had met with DPT staff last week, and was informed
that Director Sunshine decided not to send a representative since he personally
wanted to attend that day’s MDc meeting. Director Park noted that since it was
a time before the elections, Department heads were particularly busy, so Director
Sunshine had sent a letter instead to be read to the MDc members. Said letter
addressed some of the concerns raised by staff and other members of the public
to the DPT. Dr. Marone registered his extreme displeasure at Mr. sunshine’s
behavior, and wanted it be made of record that the MDc and disability community
who were affected by DPT issues did not appear to be of any great concern to
Mr. sunshine based on his behavior. Ms. REgan said that Mr. Sunshine had over
five months of warning, and opposed the reading of his letter since it would
not respond to any questions or comments that the MDc members had. She moved
that the agenda item regarding DPT be removed until such time that Director
Sunshine could attend the meeting. Director Park suggested that those persons
who came to the MDc meeting to raise their issues regarding DPT be allowed to
speak, since the item had been placed on the agenda. Ms. REgan amended her motion
to disallow the reading of Director Sunshine’s letter, but allowed public comment
on any DPT related matters. Director Park observed that when issues such as
the one presently before the MDc arose during other comission meetings, the
public was given the option to speak on the subject matter at that time, or
reserve comments until the item was placed on a future agenda. Said motion was
adopted unanimously.
A person who identified
himslef as a home care worker asked the Mdc how to make sure that Director Sunshine
will attend the meetings to respond to issues. Mr. Jim corrigan recounted his
experience regarding the SF Fire Department vehicles parking along Stanford
Street. This problem had been corrected and responded to by the SF Fire Department.
However, civilian vehicles now park illegally on the same street, and he said
that he must scold the Department of Parking and traffic for failure to enforce
the Traffic code. In addition, for the failure of the DPT ADA Coordinator to
respond to the letters of Mr. Scaff, the latest dated September 10, apparently
her response was five weeks overdue. Mr. Corrigan had requested the DPT to provide
him information on how many traffic tickets had been issued on Stanford Street
during the past six months, and he was politely told that this was unavailable.
He suggested that the MDc request this information from Director Sunshine so
that it could be determined if DPT was at fault, as well as why the ADA coordinator
was not responding to Mr. Skaff’s letters. Ms. MIzner asked if Mr. Corrigan
had been documenting the number of calls and responses, or lack thereof from
the DPT. He replied that he once called and was hung up on, so that he decided
to pursue the matter through the MDc, and he had taken at least 50 pictures
of the illegal parking. He added that he checked up on the situation once a
week. Mr. Behan said that he was working closely on this issue, and had seen
all the documentation, and asked if there had been some improvement. Mr. Corrigan
agreed that there was some improvement in that the SF Fire Department vehicles
no longer parked illegally, but there were still city or civilian vehicles,
including n elevator company truck, parking there. Mr. Behan had asked a staffmember
from DPT to speak. The staffperson was requested not to speak, since only public
comments were allowed during the item. Mr. Bob Planthold said that some of the
items listed on the agenda had been issues raised by members of the community
for a number of years through several administrations and Department heads.
He noted the difference in response time, saying that a complaint regarding
a blocked driveway received a faster response than a blocked sidewalk, and thought
this was discriminatory. He added that Mr. Corrigan had filed a complaint with
the Sunshine Ordinance Task Force, and the DPT was suvject to that law. The
Task Force will be inquiring into this matter. He added that there would be
questions on the data retrieval and response time system of the DPT. Director
Park suggested that the discussion be depersonalized, and focused on the issues,
so that the resolution could be achieved from Department to Department. Dr.
Marone said that he did not think that they were berating anyone in particular,
since anyone was faced with an access issue, it became personal. He added that
he apologized for the group, if any particular goverment officials had been
mentioned.
Mr. Kwok gave his observations
on two physical access problems on the street, and gave the location and dates.
He added that he had informed Ms. Susan Ferreyra, ADA Coordinator of the Department
of Public Works via telephone regarding these issues, but had not received a
written response. Dr. Marone asked Director Park if these were some of the issues
he was addressing on a Department to Department basis. Director Park replied
that he had personally encountered two similar situations, and these were being
handled on a case by ccase basis, and perhaps later on an overall basis in the
Self-evaluation plans. Dr. Marone noted that this was an issue that Director
Park could perhaps address through a policy statement or training that could
be done Department to Department that could alleviate the situation. Mr. Evans
observed that the arrogance in the DPT was not only in the Executive offices,
but also extends down to the Parking control Officers. He cited instances where
the officers would refuse to cite or call in to complaint about behicles illegally
blocking curb ramps or driveways, forcing him to call in the complaint himself.
This often prevented a ramped taxi from picking him up at the curb. He further
stated that the officer should be able to cite the vehicle immediately without
having a complainant call in the incident. Dr. Marone said that this seemed
to be toward the direction of collecting information on occurrences of problems,
and he hoped that members stayed clear of characterizations of those involved.
Ms. Mizner said that she would entertain a motion that would request the Maor
to write a letter to Department heads informing them not to have City vehicles
used by staff park on sidewalks and restricted zones. Mr. Evans made this motion.
Director Park said that this item was not calendared for action, and suggested
that it be placed on the next agenda for a vote. Ms. Mizner said that the item
had been apprpriately calendared for discussion, and there was public testimony,
so that a motion requesting for the letter was appropriate. Director Park said
that at the unanimous vote of the MDC, the item had been cancelled from the
calendar. Dr. Marone said it would be appropriate to calendar the item and motion
as action items for the january agenda. The MDc broke for recess, and reconvened
at 2:45 pm.m..
PRESENTATION ON THE SELF-EVALUATION/
TRANSITION PLANS:
Mr. Logan Hopper, the consultant
working on the Transition plan part of the project, gave an update on the project.
He said that his team took the work of surveying the various city facilities
quite seriously, and what they have been seeing was quite sobering. there were
barriers that existed, which needed to be identified so that decisions could
be made. He distributed a survey to the MDc members to list what they thought
were the three most accessible, and three most inaccessible City-owned or operated
facilities. He asked them to mail these back to the project team, and gave his
telephone number: ) 415) 364-1848. He added that their scope of work did not
include the San francisco Unified School district. Mr. Kwok said that he expected
the information to be provided in alternate format, as well as in a uniform
manner from both the consultants. Mr. Hopper reported that they had completed
the survey of all the libraries, and were currently working on the airport,
public meeting and assembly places such as the Davis Symphony Hall, Bill Graham
civic Auditorium, and others. Margen and Associates were sending out surveys
to the various City Departments and would work on the projgrammatic access part
of the project. A preliminary survey had been done on some 13 different De[Departments.
Mr. Evans inquired if the surveys would cover off-site meeting places in the
community which various Departments or the Board of Supervisors hold in the
neighborhoods.Mr. Hopper replied that their firm would survey each facility
where the City would hold an activity or program, except for those used by the
School District. The surveys would cover all City-owned facilities used by Departments,
City-onwed facilities leased out to private entities, or those privately owned
facilities leased by the city. Ms. Regan said that if anyone in the public knew
of any meetings held by any City Department or agency in an inaccessible location
or facility, to please inform her immediately. She added that any rulings made
during such meetings held at inaccessible locations were not legal, under the
Sunshine ordinance and Brown.Act.Dr. Marone inquired how the surveys were to
be distributed to the general public to generate a larger response. Mr. Hopper
said that while he had 40 copies with him that day, other persons may call the
telephone number given out earlier, and request one by mail. Dr. Marone added
that he encouraged members of the public to inform Mr. Hopper about access issues
realted to the School district. In responmse to ms. Mizner’s question, Mr. Hopper
siad that he expected that his portion of the work, and that of Margen and Associates
would be completed by April or May.
DISCUSSION OF PHYSICIAN
ASSISTED DYING/ ASSEMBLY BILL 1592:
Director Park noted that
the two persons who were on opposing sides of the issue could not be present
that day, but would make comments over the telephone. Mr. John Brooke, president
of Americans for Death with dignity, the organization which was the principal
sponsor for AB 1592 the Death with dignity Act patterned closely after that
which was passed by the State of OrgegonOregon, made a presentation. He said
that the issue was a tough issuewith no easy answers on either side, and although
he had strong feelings on thisit, he respected those who felt differently and
more than anything else, wished to engage in dialog. He said that institutions,
organizations, and members of the disability commmunity were on both sides of
the issue, and one could not generalize regarding one group within the population.
Mr. Brooke added that a field poll conducted in April 199 showed that approximately
75% of the persons polled in california thought that a terminally ill or dying
competent person should have the right to request and receive a prescription
from a willing physician that would enable them to hasten their death. He said
that his organization believed that was so, and further believed that was only
so under carefully crafted conditions which he explained further. The subject
had been an issue in California for over a decade, with an actual initiative
which lost by a few percentage points a few years ago. He added that the Supreme
court had looked into the issue, that the State of Oregon had passed it in 1994,
and reaffirmed the same in 1997. The matter was now under review by the U.s.
congress, which would overturn the Oregon law, and this Bill would probably
be before the Senate by next year. Mr Brooke said that there were morality and
social policy issues involved. He added that he was a United Church of Christ
minister, and the death with Dignity Act presents a principal moral choice.
No one who disagreed with it need to take advantage of the choice. He did not
think that this was suicide in the usual way suicide was contruedconstrued,
involving depressed persons. The proposal involved terminally ill persons who
through loss of autonomy, suffering, etc., had chosen to hasten death. Having
made that choice, only the person could make the request from the Physician.
As a social policy issue, the Physician should give to the person making the
request all information regarding all possible alternatives, be diagnosed by
at least two Physicians as being terminally ill, with death expected to take
place within six months, and there should be repeated requests made, with two
oral and one written within two weeks with two witnesses who would not gain
anything from the death. The requests shall be rescinded at any timeby the patient,
and the witnesses believe that there was no coercion place upon the patient
to make the requests. Mr. Brooke read parts of the legislation, and cited that
age and disability alone would not make the patient eligible under the proposed
law. While it was true that 90% to 95% of cases could be palliated, his organization
belived that there were cases where pain could not be palliated. He noted a
recent sensitively written article in the Los Angeles Times, and disagreed with
an article written by a Ms. Saunders in a local newspaper. He said that the
proposal was driven by compassion, and responsible choice for those who may
need it. Mr. Barnes said that most persons with disabilities had little or no
experience working with the dying. . He gave several examples of his wide experience
and work with the dying. He said that he was asking the MDC members to consider
the very human side of the proposed legislation. Mr. Barnes said that this legislation
would apply only to a miniscule segment of the population.
Ms. Marilyn Golden of Disability
rights Educational Defense Fund ( DREDF) and Dr. Paul Longmore spoke over the
telephone bridge.. Longmore said that the propoenets of the issue had for a
long time focusing on the economics of the issue. He said that while the proposed
bill said that the Physician must inform the patient of alternatives, the fact
was that the legislation did not provide any of these alternatives. He said
that while the legislation guaranteed access to any other alternatives and ensured
against coercion of the patients, , the fact was that Health care administrators
or bureaucrats were already overruling supervision of Physicians. Dr. Longmore
gave an example of denials by bureaucrats of Physicians’ recommendations. Dr.
Longmore also provided additional information regarding Health Management Organizations,
the Oregon Death with dignity legislation, and the impact of the same on consumers.
He said that with profit driven corporate managed care, and a system of public
health insurance for poor people that makes the holding down of costs a top
priority, no assisted suicide law can operate fairly. Inevitably, the right
to die, but not the right to treatment will have an adverse impact on socially
or economically disadvantaged groups. He said that where the country had failed
to provide adequate health care for all its citizens, it was unconscionable
to consider physician assisted suicide. Ms. Golden briefly summarized her involvement
in organizations against the proposed legislation. She said that DREDF had a
working paper on the subject, and would be glad to provide it to staff so that
MDc members could receive copies. Ms. Golden added that 34 States banned physician
assistedsuicide , and the disability community had worked against physician
assisted suicide in many States at many levels. What had been discovered was
that while many persons initially saw physician assisted suicide as a good thing
to have available, in practice, it did not work out to be so. Of primary concern
to her was the proponent’s insistence that the Bill impacted the terminally
ill only, or those determined as to be dying within the next six months, and
not nescessarily those who are disabled and have chronic illnesses. She said
that in today’s law, society and medicine, no clear distinctions exist.There
is no such thing as a clear distinction or clear safeguard, with what the bill’s
intent to do may be stretched far beyond the author’s original intentions. Additionally,
it was not uncommon for determinations on short life spans for patients to turn
out to be wrong.People with disabilities have been told many thingsabout their
physical conditions, and these predictions very often turned out to be wildly
inaccurate.She added that the amount of anecdotal evidence was great regarding
the unreliability of predictions of death. Ms. Golden also said that the problem
of distinguishing between those with terminal illness and those with long term
disability was a great one. She said that the fact was that across the medical
field, there was much ignorance, or rampant prejudice against persons with long
term disabilities.Examples of ignorance within the legal system regarding this
distingction were provided. Legislation such as that which was proposed were
expanded despite the protective language they contain, and she gave the Netherlands
as an example of this. She said that the Dutch law had far stricter protections
than AB 1592, but these were largely ignored. Ms. Golden said that between 1/3
and ½ of those who were subjected to euthanasia did not ask for death themselves,
but were subjected to a determination by others. She said that many persons
with disabilities know that after a disability worsens, there is a period of
despair, after which, people often adapt, or cope, then live happier lives.
The proposed legislation gives the patient only two weeks to mae this adjustment.
Ms. Jakkee Bryson commented
on the procedures for the public to make comments on the agenda items, and alleged
that the MDc was in violation of the Brown Act.Mr. Bill Barnes, the Mayor’s
Policy Adviser on AIDS-HIV said that the Mayor had coordinated a meeting with
a number of organizations in 1998 to discuss the issue ofphysician assisted
dying in light of the Supreme court decision. He said that 90% of people with
AIDS supported the ending of their lives with the assistance of a physician,
due to the terminal nature of their illness. Additionally, he said that there
were some considerations that HMOs had which were not in place in Oregon, as
dr. Longmore had pointed out. The position taken by the Mayor’s Office on AIDS
and HIV policy was to askk the author of the Assembly bill to revise her bill
to account for some of these issues, such as what were the roles of HMOs, and
what the role of a State ten times the size of Oregon were. This will allow
the people affected by the legislation to make the proper choices for themselves,
and provide protection from coercion or abuse. Mr. Barnes noted an editorial
from the Contra Costa times, and offered to make this available to the MDC.
He said that as a person affected by these issues, he would like to live each
day that he was entitled to, while also hoping that should he become so ill
that there would be no other recourse, he would be able to seek his physician’s
help. He did not think that AB 1592 would allow him to do this. Mr. Barnes felt
that revisions needed to be made regarding the legislation, and that the disability
community needed to work on it. Ms. Magdalena Soul said that as a person with
a disability, she had actually been misdiagnosed by physicians. A condition
which was initially determined to be life threatening was discovered to be non-life
threatening later on. She added that if a condition which she may have did turn
out to be terminal, she wanted to have a choice where and when to die. Ms. Peggy
Koster called in her comments via the telephone bridge. She said that she had
a number of issues covered under the item. She said that many of the public
were confused about the issues regarding being allowed to die, or choosing to
die. She added that many able bodied persons did not know the issues and difficulties
of persons with disabilitiesregarding MediCal, Medicare, health insurance, and
how these affected one’s quality of life. The discussion should not center around
idealogical issues, but rather, the financial and practical, since these were
the primary factors which affected persons with disabilities regarding the issue.
Ms. Mizner asked Ms. Golden
and Dr. Longmore what could be done for those persons who were truly terminally
illand who chose to end their lives. Ms. Golden acknolwedged that there was
problably a small fraction of the population who were also probably well off
that would benefit from the legislation policy. The vast majority of the population,
the disenfranchsed, the disabled, and the poor, would be harmed by it. Dr. Longmore
added that he had much personal experience with cases of people trying to end
their lives that he was dubious of people’s ability to discern when a person
wanted to die from untreatable medical conditions, when other factors are involved,
such as inadequate psychological support, inadequate pain management, fears
about financial matters, etc. His concern was that under the present operation
of Health care management, there were so many factors that impinged on people
who were sick, disabled, or dying, which were not inherent to the illness, but
rather, endemic to the system. Hhe said that he would be worried about assuming
that a person wanted to die simply because of one’s illness, as opposed to other
issues that could be dealth with. A member of the public made some brief comments
regarding the situation of the health insurance industry and how this affected
disabled persons. The meeting was adjourned at 4:20 p.m.