human services for people with parking vouchers. the sfmta took into consideration some of the challenges and those economic challenges were never meant to be addressed through the disabled parking placard. as we see from the data to other cities is the best way to increase public parking is to charge the fees at meters. it takes the incentives away for misusing placards. in pittsburgh for example, the available of parking downtown increasing by over 500 percent. >> one of the things that we learned from the department of

motor vehicles was that the application was something to consider in the time. parking accessible themselves wasn't available. you had to turn it with your thumbs and for finger and we didn't have curb ramps in the 1970s to get up on the sidewalks to pay the meter. what the or again of the payment exemption was really about trying to find a reasonable accommodation and inaccessible parking structure. if our recommendations do move forward, it has to move forward with the continue condition that it's required with accessible meters that accept multiple methods of payments. an example the mta is replacing

it's meters so it allows you to use your smartphone or old fashion coins and the new meters will be subject to the ada height requirements as well. >> it's important that we emphasize that the recommendations are a package but the technology component which you just mentioned is a critical piece of this. we can't be asking people to pay if they are not able to pay. the payment exemption initially came because back in the 70s people cooperate turf the knob and do the actual physical manipulation needed to operate the meter. technology has mitigated a lot of that and payments would only be something that we would find acceptable if that technology was in place. >> speaking of payment, our

next slide is to direct ability to the use. the next one is our operating signal. that's one public feature in our public right of way that we need more of. that's one possible idea of revenue collection from blue zones can be collected. >> the community was talking a lot about the historical oppression of people with disabilities and san francisco's commitment to make sure all people with disability have access to aspects of life and also like i spoke about earlier perhaps transportation vouchers to health and human service agencies.

>> our last side is to establish reasonable time limits. what is pictured is an accessible parking sign, the blue person and the international symbol. to a limit of 4 hours on the disciple. the committee found to make parking more available for people who need it, instituting time limits was an important piece of this puzzle. we focus in other communities for disabled parking placards what we found both when we talked to transportation providers and advocates with people with disabilities that time limits seem to have very little impact on the communities ability to move freely and travel about.

>> the committee also looked at the local green zone paid by local merchants. what type of time limits exemption would be fair to people with disabilities to enable folks using disabled parking placards access to the green zone but also so the merchants are not having their car stuck in the green zone all day. our method is to look at we modify the time limits around the green zones. >> our last slide is really the reason why we are here today.

it's title accessible parking committee recommendation. we have a couple of places for to you go on our website to learn more and leave comments. the first website is sfmta.com/parking access. and then at the parking access at sfmta, parkingaccess at sf mta.com and you can see all the research and documents and reports we reviewed. you can call for more information4155 701-5380. that concludes the

formal presentation by the committee. i would ask the chair if you have the flexibility if any of other committee members want to make a brief comment before you open up to questions and comments? >> thank you. are there any community members present that would like to make a comment? >> it's back in your hands. >> thank you very much. now we are going to part b. we will be having our report from councilmember wong. >> are you ready, mr. wong? >> okay. now i am. yes, may 16,

the fiscal access committee had a joint meeting with the joint module accessibility advisory committee. we got to the same presentation that you just heard. one of the most important things for me as a member of the mayor's disability council, the mac and accessible parking advisory committee and the mac is importance of hearing public comment. i also wanted to share with you a summary of the mac comments from yesterday. mac -- one member recommended that the sfmta convert a parking garage to disabled parking only and

run para transitentrance service to this to deliver transportation services and discussed limited income individuals maybe negatively impacted by having to pay at the meter. a member committee member expressed that the dmv should review all placards be certified that they are valid and continues to be. one member felt that time limits and payment are good ideas and be fairer. the members pointed out that many low income people areas do not have enough blue

zones for people who need them. areas of judea and 23rd was specifically cited. a member expressed concern that red temporary placard are subject to a lot of abuse which should be dealt with. one member expressed frustration over the implementation of street fares often which block blue spaces and replace them with temporary spaces which are often occupied by vehicles of fair merchants or have their access impacted by bicycles parked at tecommitt

bicycles should pay for parking before disabled parking placards owners should. a committee member raised ideas that all taxis should be given placards so they can use these at blue zone parking and drop off an every bus zone should have it. a member specified that placards often park everyday and changing this practice would solve the problem. that concludes my report as chair of the access committee meeting. our next meeting is friday june 14, 130

to 2:30 at market street on the first floor. we hope you will join us then. thank you. >> thank you, again thank you for the presentation and now we are going to open it up for public comment from the council first, please. and we have chip? >> yes. a question is for carla and the committee. are there plans to make a, as much as a the disabled and financially challenged population to get a discount on munis, is it possible to get a discount on meters? >> good afternoon, madam chair and members of the council. the

committee didn't really discuss , actually the committee discussed the issue of the affordability quite a bit and there was concern with members of our committee as you heard from mr. wong there was from the mac as well about the potential impact of parking payment on people's ability to pay and therefore ability to access parking. the primary goal of this was to improve access to parking and as you heard from the presentation our findings from the research that the most significant ways to do that was this body of recommendations that included requiring payment at the meter to really remove the incentive for misuse. the placard program put in place not to address income issues, but to address physical disability issues. so

we did focus on that. there was some discussion about ability to pay and the impact on that. we have the transit card, rtc card that provides low income discount. at this time it's not something that we've looked at in terms of parking. not sure there would be an easy way for us to implement that and also people who have access to a motor vehicle tend to i think a lower number of people that close to vehicles are low income. so it is something that i imagine that we'll hear more as the process goes along and something that we can look at. it's not something that the committee recommended at this point. >> okay. thank you. >> bob, i wanted to amplify on that. issue

ignored or dropped. when that suggestion came to us, i started to realize that would be a very staff time burdensome issue because maybe this year you win the lottery, maybe and suddenly your income jumps that you might be eligible this year but because you win the lottery next year you are rolling in dough. maybe this year i lose the job in july and i have a problem and my income drops. maybe this year i'm not eligible. this year i might be. it has to be year to year recertification. it's extra staff time and extra paperwork. we thought let's try to do something broader. as jessie pointed out, we do have

the suggestion, maybe it can find a way to supplement those that are low income. that might be easier than a discount. how do you deal with that at the meter? >> they have smartphones to do just about everything else. i have one more question. along those lines, it's a great segway to recertification where those issues explored it all maybe every two or three years rather than automatically getting a placard that people, you know have to go through it. some sort of process of recertification. because lives do change and situations change and needs change for many of us. >> we did look at that and here again, there is also a red placard for those with the temporary disability. it's good for six months and it can be

renewed at least once for a long-term major surgery, that may be an option. the way it's worded, it's meant to be the doctor certifying, i, you, the applicant has a permanent disability. maybe the surgery problem gets healed in the future. as for the data certification you can't count on it. you can't say let's look at it in five years. the dmv told us it would take a lot of time to get to recertify everyone so often. it's extra staff, time, cost with the efficiency with the system as it is. >> thank you. >> i will just add one quick

comment to that too. we didn't want to be overall burdensome for people who are eligible for placards by making them to have to go back to the doctors to get recertified. we didn't want them to have extra appointments. it was something we talked about in our committee meeting. >> thank you. anymore? i want to thank you because you just reeducated me. we learn something new everyday. the placard and it is not for a payment. that was like blam. it was 4 people with disabilities. it wasn't made to have less on the meter. thank you guys. that is a big education teaching us

something. i mean, i'm sure a lot of people probably think the same thing. it's for like no income and i'm glad you said that. it is not for that. the income will be changed. you will have to pay. it's kind of hard, but we have to do what we have to do to keep everyone with disabilities safe. thank you very much for your presentation. we are going to open it up. no more council members? any staff? anybody on the bridge line? >> hello? >> yes, you are on. >> yes. i'm trying to get away

from my tv so it will stop echo. >> okay. take your time. >> thank you for your patience. you know, just watching this and they are talking about the -- i live on government assistance. okay. government assistance. that's how i feed myself and bathe myself with soap. it's all government assistance. so if i want to drive and park at a meter, i understand working through it, but you got to work through it

with people with low income in mind. because you may have done the research all around the nation, but we all could admit that san francisco is different than any city in the united states of america. okay. and this city is an expensive city, it's expensive to go eat. this is an expensive city. so if you are living on government assistance and you need to go somewhere and you need to park there and pay the meter and you only can stay there for three hours, i'm a person with a disability. i'm in a wheelchair. i have to get myself situated. that's going

to take time. it may take me 5-10 minutes just to get myself situated and when i get out of the car. so, i appreciate what you are doing, but i think you really got to think about people with low incomes in the city and county of san francisco. thank you. >> is there anybody else on the bridge line? >> thank you very much. >> okay. we are going to public comment. and we have viera first. >> i disagree on payment for

meters because i have a placard and two disabilities. heart lung problems and my knees are slowing down too. but, it's been very hard to find a blue zone. they are always full. and it is marvelous to be able to use a parking meter and i use them in neighborhoods that are not considered desirable because i have always worked in neighborhoods that are not considered desirable so i may have to walk a little farther. i'm delighted that they are

going to have more blue zones, but the negative in the reduction of time. that could be a problem for some people. we didn't hear from people who are using it for all day volunteer or all day lowering pay jobs. i saw they had three jobs and two of them were volunteer on their websites. if you have a car, one thing we said if you have a car you can afford to pay at a meter. well, some people, seniors are likely to have an old car. mine is 14 years old and i have another member of the advisory council i'm on is 22 years old. so you are not buying a new car. you are trying to get by and trying to keep mobile and involved in the life of the community and you are trying to go to cultural programs and this is an essential part, the disabled placard, the last means of

independence for many people. i also think it is bad public policy and we have seen it already beginning to happen when we are reducing the amount of things that we've had for disabled. like when i told the munis transportation planners don't end the 38 ocean beach because it's my way to get to kaiser. that meant nothing to her. so, i lost that. then this is going to come and this will make it hard if you have to pay. and the other thing, the third thing is that munis is now has no incentive for taxis. they were saying do you have ideas to incentivize taxis or you may have no more because the taxi drivers don't like it. i would like to say my two

things were don't support the parking meter charge and the other thing is that this council has said they have no blue zones where there are tow away zones. that came from years ago. i would like you to rescind that too at some point. >> thank you. we have howard next. okay. good afternoon.

council members, madam chair. last week i had a lunch with dog patch and the merchants association business directory, the welcome letter from goldstein said here you find the weather is sunny and people are friendly and we have abundant free parking. mta can't do anything about the weather, but if mta has it's way parts of strans can be neither abundant nor free for the people or the general

public. of course placard fraud should be investigated. i do support recertification. i have had a placard for 30 years and it comes like clock award. i could have died 10 years ago and it would have come. i know someone who did diane -- die and it keeps coming to their family. policy should not be considered in a vacuum. it should be a campaign like some people against cars. including adding meters in residential neighborhoods that did not have meters before. eliminating many spaces even though not designated as such, for example elimination of parking spaces on oak street, the reduction of the defactor access for space on jfk drive, the plans to get rid of a lot of parking on polk

street, the plans to get rid of all parking in 2/3 of a mile on masonic. so learn more about mta's campaign against cars because i think this is relevant to the issues on the committee. please go to save masonic.com. save polk street which is save polk street.com. district 5 diary. that's district no. 5diary.com. meter madness which is meter madness

do the word press.com. eastern neighborhoods united fronts which the sfenuf.org. and then also sf info which is sfpar .info. thank you. miss jackie. we are going to ask if you would limit your comment to 2 minutes because we still have a lot of stuff on the agenda if