· Anti-Smoking Legislation: The Board of Supervisors passed the anti-smoking legislation, which the MDC has vigorously supported. Chair Parsons hopes the Board will continue to consider environmental concerns for people with disabilities and to perhaps expand the current legislation. Chair Parsons reported that San Francisco State University’s campus has now limited smoking to four sections of the campus and imposed an $85 fine for smoking on campus elsewhere.
6 INFORMATION ITEM: Report from the Director of the Mayor’s Office on Disability.
Director Mizner reported on the following items:
- The City Budget: The City’s Controller has released a new report on the City’s Budget, which is currently $6.6 Billion. $3.5 billion of that is Non-General Fund money; $3.1 billion is General Fund, and of that $1.2 billion is discretionary. Emergency departments, City Departments, Mayor’s Office Departments, etc receive their funding out of the General Fund. The Airport, SFMTA, the Port, and the PUC are Enterprise departments. The School District and the Housing Authority are not within the City budget. We have a deficit because of revenue weakness, expenditure increases, and loss of one-time solutions to balance last year’s budget. The total projected deficit is $522 million dollars. Additionally, the City has laid off about 17,000 employees with the intent to re-hire them as part-time employees later. MOD staff is among those being laid off and re-hired.
- The Census: Everyone should fully complete the Census forms as the number of responses will affect how many federal dollars the City receives. Those who would like help filling out the Census forms may call 1-866-861-2010 or the Mayor’s Office on Disability.
- The Historic Preservation Commission: The Commission received and appreciated the note from the Council and is reviewing language for a resolution in support of access to historic buildings.
- Parking Placards and Enforcement: There will be a portion of today’s meeting dedicated to parking placards and enforcement of parking. MTA has worked to improve enforcement of parking placard laws, and is also working at the state level on legislation. This meeting will provide an opportunity for the disability community and MTA to share concerns and strategies on placards, abuse, and enforcement.
- Curb Ramps: This year has had an increase in funding for curb ramps primarily from stimulus dollars. The Mayor’s Office on Disability welcomes ideas and suggestions for prioritizing use of these dollars to intersections or areas of need.
7 INFORMATION ITEM: Disability Placards – Enforcement Policies and Practices. Presentation by James Lee, Deputy Director, Enforcement Division, Julie Rosenberg, Hearing Division Manager and Janet Martinsen, Government Affairs Analyst, San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency.
Ms. Martinsen reported that on October 11, 2009, Governor Schwarzenegger signed into law California Vehicle Code Sec. 8144, which allows local jurisdictions to impose fines of between $250 and $1,000 for illegal use of a disability placard. The MTA Board of Directors then adopted a civil penalty of $825 for several California Vehicle Code violations, such as stolen, counterfeited, altered, or expired plaque address or license plates, misuse of placards or plates, a plate or placard displayed on a vehicle not being used to transport and is not in a reasonable proximity of the person with a disability to whom it is registered. The Board of Directors also added a 10% additional penalty assessment for blue zone violations and for cars that block wheelchair ramps.
James Lee reported that the Disability Placard Detail was created in 1995 to improve access and cut down on placard abuse. This Detail has ten Parking Control Officers (PCOs) who conduct stings in the city twice a week. These PCOs have been through training, which involves one week of training on detailed report writing and specific violations involving placards and a second week of training is completed in the field with an experienced member of the team. These trained PCOs can tell when a placard has been altered. Only these ten officers are permitted to confiscate a placard whereas others may only issue a ticket.
Mr. Lee reported that the officers have a script for conversations with drivers and placard users. Where the person with a disability is in close proximity to the vehicle, or within an average of two blocks, PCOs will do everything in their power to help locate a person with a disability to verify the placard belongs to them. People who transport a person with a disability are to remain in close proximity at all times and not run errands with the placard still visible.
Julie Rosenberg introduced herself as the Manager of the Hearings Division. Many times when there is placard abuse, the car will be towed in addition to being ticketed and fined. Towing can cost the vehicle driver between $300 and $400, and the fine for abuse is $825, which leads to a very expensive penalty for misuse of a placard. The Hearings Division reviews protests on a case-by-case basis and realizes that tickets are at times erroneously given. DMV records can be incorrect and mitigating circumstances may warrant dismissal of a ticket. There are three main types of violations: 1) displaying a placard that’s been reported to the DMV as expired, lost or stolen 2) parking at colored meters beyond time limits and restrictions, and 3) failure to move for street cleaning or in loading zones.
To protest tickets for placard abuse, Ms. Rosenberg explained there are two levels of review. First, the person ticketed may submit a written request to MTA and SFMTA, which is reviewed by a clerk. Secondly, if the protest letter is denied then the person may request a hearing with the Hearings Division, which can hold an emergency meeting if necessary and provides accommodations for people appearing in person, by phone, or by internet. If the Hearings Division still denies the protest and the person ticketed so wishes, s/he may appeal to the Superior Court.
Having a placard in California means there are several responsibilities that come with it. The placard must hang from the review mirror unless it is physically difficult or impossible for the placard holder to hang the placard there. Also, if a car is towed, the placard holder is going to be responsible for the towing. The Hearing Division cannot refund a towing fee as an independent contractor of the city handles towing for SFMTA.
Ms. Martinsen concluded the presentation with information that the SFMTA has put together a Q&A for people with disabilities regarding placard use and abuse in San Francisco. This information will be available on the agency’s web site.
PUBLIC COMMENT:
Beatrice Duarte, a Rehabilitation Counselor with the Department of Rehabilitation, said that she has received three tickets for placard abuse in the last year, and this has interfered with her ability to work with her clients and to perform her job. Ms. Duarte, who is blind, has a valid placard as well as a driver who drives her to work and assists her in the office. Ms. Duarte stated she has had bad experiences with PCOs who have treated her rudely and taken her away from her work. She asked that the PCOs keep in mind how these encounters can interfere with one’s job.
Bob Planthold commented that he is impressed with MTA and the level of involvement they have with this enforcement. Mr. Planthold is familiar with placard abuse from his experience on a civil grand jury that wrote a report on the issue several years ago. He further mentioned an article in the SF Guardian regarding funding measures for MUNI that suggested a severe increase in placard abuse fines and wanted to make several people, particularly policy-makers, aware of the issue of how detrimental high fees will be to the disability community.
Howard Chabner suggested that people with disabilities who have placards should be required to renew the placards every two years to verify their disability and to reduce fraud. Additionally, Mr. Chabner suggested a periodic change in placard color to reduce counterfeit. He also raised the issue of what should happen when the placard is needed to drop someone with a disability off at night, to travel together to travel together to a destination, but is not needed the next morning. Ms. Rosenberg replied that such a violation is why hearings exist, but that officers do use such discretion in the field.
Director Mizner reported that the number of people with disability placards in San Francisco is not out of proportion to the number of San Franciscans with disabilities.
William Farrell expressed concern about the reported rudeness of PCOs who have confronted people with alleged placard abuse.
Lolita, the Director of Senior Services at Services of San Francisco (SSF), offered to distribute information regarding the parking placards in different languages at each of the SSF’s sixteen branch offices.
Co-chair Parsons asked for clarification on the refund of towing fees and other fines if the MTA is at fault. She suggested that MTA create a database where repeated offenders can be flagged. Finally Chair Parsons asked that the issue of penalizing the drivers of placard holders be addressed by MTA. Ms. Rosenberg stated that if a car has been towed in error, the MTA will automatically refund the tow fees. She also suggested that for those who receive multiple tickets, the name and/or badge number of the ticketing officer and additional feedback is very much needed. Ms. Rosenberg may be reached at 415-701-5444 or Julie.rosenberg@sfmta.com.
Mr. Lee reiterated that there is a two-block radius for the “close proximity” standard. Additionally, the officer will try to make every attempt possible to locate the person with a disability before issuing a ticket.
Councilmember Harriet Chiu-Chan asked for the date of the article mentioned by Bob Planthold. The article was in the most recent issue of the SF Guardian on March 17, 2010. Additionally, www.spur.org has information on MUNI’s 28-point funding plan.
Joanna Fraguli asked how a disability placard abuse officer could be distinguished from a general officer or plain-clothes officer. Mr. Lee replied that the person with a disability would not be able to know.
Director Mizner noted that it appears as though the vast majority of stops by the Placard Detail are legitimate stops and that for those who feel they’ve been incorrectly stopped by the Detail, 311 is an appropriate place to lodge a complaint. Another number for 311 is 415-553-1200. Director Mizner also asked how someone in Ms. Duarte’s situation could recover a wrongfully confiscated placard quickly. Julie Rosenberg stated that is an excellent reason for an expedited hearing with the Hearings Division.
Co-chair Woodall asked when the script would go into effect. Mr. Lee reported that the script has been in effect since 1995 but a new one should be drafted by MTA. Meanwhile, MTA is willing to work with the Disability Community, to listen to its concerns, and to do a training session on placard rights and responsibilities when possible.
Councilmember Grigsby described an altercation she had with a PCO a few years ago where the officer refused to believed she was the person to whom the placard belonged. She thanked the MTA for coming to the meeting and encouraged the PCOs to continue sensitivity training.
8 INFORMATION AND POSSIBLE ACTION ITEM: Curb Ramp ADA Transition Plan – Construction & Funding Priorities. Presentation by Ken Spielman, Director of Public Works.
Mr. Spielman gave an overview of curb ramps and curb ramp construction in San Francisco. The ADA requires a Transition Plan for curb ramps including forecast of costs and construction schedules.
When an inquiry, a request, or complaint comes through 311 or MOD relating to a curb ramp or accessibility in a public right of way, the request goes to Kevin Jensen, the Department’s ADA Coordinator. He reviews the inquiry and contacts all parties involved, then routes it to the proper office. Then an engineer generally will investigate that inquiry, reporting the findings and recommendations to Mr. Jensen, and then enter the information into DPW’s database.
The Department is evaluating how it prioritizes curb ramp construction and is developing a public survey to get input. Factors currently taken into consideration are the condition score of the curb ramp, the type of inquiry (such as inquiries from a person with disability, a repeat complaint, an inquiry from an employee of the city and county of San Francisco, the date of inquiry), the proximity to government facilities, hospitals and clinics, transit stops, and commercial zones, and the distribution of the disability population and density. Other factors include the ease with which a curb ramp may be installed and whether an intersection has curb ramps already installed.
The Department is installing raised crosswalks at some intersections, especially in streets that are steep and where it is very difficult to get a standard curb ramp in at a corner.
Funding for the curb ramps comes from multiple sources, including Certificates of Participation bond funds (a total of $5 million) from MOD, Proposition K sales tax funds, the Transportation Development Act, and this year, Federal Stimulus Funds.
Co-chair Woodall asked if there is a standard with respect to the tactile domes such that they would feel the same to people with vision impairments yet be easy for people who use wheelchairs to navigate. Mr. Spielman replied that the domes are less than a half-inch high and the standards are set by the ADA and the State Building Code.
Co-Chair Parsons asked if there is a map showing curb ramp placements in the city that could be used to map a trip from Point A to Point B using the sidewalks in San Francisco. Mr. Spielman responded that it is an idea the Department is looking into.
Councilmember Chan remarked that the yellow tiles in the curb ramps are often slippery, particularly during rainstorms. In response, Mr. Spielman said that over time the material on the yellow tiles will wear down and become smooth, but the Department is looking into other materials that will provide more traction on the tiles.
Mr. Spielman may be reached at: Kenneth.spielman@sfgov.org or by phone at 558-4541.
Director Mizner expressed her appreciation for Mr. Spielman’s work, noting he was responsible for almost $2 million in funding for curb ramps from Federal Stimulus dollars.
9 INFORMATION ITEM: The Access Appeals Commission (AAC) – What It Is and What It Does. Presentation by AAC President Arnie Lerner, AIA, CASp.
The Access Appeals Commission hears written appeals of actions by the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) regarding enforcement of disabled access and the adaptability provisions of both the California Building Code and San Francisco Building Code. The Commission conducts hearings regarding any action by D.B.I. in the enforcement and interpretation of disability access and adaptability provisions of the code, such as denial of unreasonable hardship requests, requests for ratification of the unreasonable hardship requests, and appeals of orders of abatement issued by DBI’s Director for violations pertaining to disability access. The Board meets on the second and fourth Wednesday of every month in the San Francisco City Hall. Meeting notices and agendas are posted in City Hall, the public library, and are available through the Internet at www.sfgov.organize. For questions on the appeals process, contact Richard Halloran at 415-558-6110.
An appeal is generally not brought by a member of the public, but by property owners or by their agents, including architects, firms, and commercial tenants. Appeals must be filed at the A.A.C. office on the third floor of the Department of Building Inspection at 1660 Mission Street. Appeals must be filed with the Board a minimum of nineteen days in advance of a meeting. The filing fee for an appeal is $374 and may be waived for those declaring themselves to be indigent. Each claimant or representative has a chance to address the AAC, as well as members of the public on items of interest within the subject matter jurisdiction of the AAC.
The Building Inspects Commission appoints the five AAC commissioners. Two members must be persons with disabilities and three must be experienced in building or construction.
The Commission is also involved in developing policy. For instance, it spent the last year working with the code advisory commission on a bulletin approved this week for destination elevators in high-rise buildings.
Co-chair Parsons asked if the minutes of the Appeals Commission are available to the public. Mr. Lerner replied that they are, and anyone interested in obtaining them should call Rick Halloran (contact information above).
10 INFORMATION ITEM: Report of the Disability Disaster Preparedness Committee. Presentation by Joanna Fraguli, MOD.
On March 2, 2010, the Disability Disaster Preparedness Committee conducted outreach to over one hundred community-based organizations that provide services to seniors and people with disabilities. This meeting introduced Statements of Understanding (SOUs) between those bodies and the City to be able to provide support services for the aftermath of a disaster. Over forty-five organizations participated and twenty-five community-based organizations serving people with disabilities and seniors are working with the City. The draft of the SOU has now been approved by the City Attorney's office. There will be separate outreach for ASL interpreters and real-time captioners to enable effective communication after a disaster.
The Disability Disaster Preparedness Committee meetings are not regularly scheduled. The public should check the MOD website for updates on this Committee.
11 INFORMATION ITEM: Report from the Physical Access Committee. Presentation by Howard Chabner, Chair.
Mr. Chabner noted that at the last meeting of the Committee, Mr. Spielman and Mr. Scott both gave presentations on curb ramps and the ADA Transition Plan and requested public input. It was also noted that the Capital Plan for the next ten years assumes several bond measures will be put before voters.
The Committee meets on the second Friday of each month. The next meeting of the Physical Access Committee will be at Friday, April 9 from1:30 to 3:30 p.m. at City Hall in Room 421. There will be an update on various bond projects from the Department of Recreation and Parks that include physical access measures.
12 PUBLIC COMMENT: Items not on today’s agenda but within the jurisdiction of the MDC.
Walter Paulson sang a song of appreciation for city programs that help people with disabilities.
13 DISCUSSION ITEM: Council Member comments and announcements.
There were no comments.
14 ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:08 p.m.