The Bay Citizen thanks our sponsors

Oakland North is a hyperlocal news site produced by students at the UC Berkeley Graduate School of Journalism with support from the Ford Foundation. Our goals are to improve Oakland's local coverage, experiment with online and digital media, and listen to you about the stories and features that most interest you. Feel free to get in touch at staff@oaklandnorth.net or follow us at Twitter.com/northoaklandnow.


The Bay Citizen thanks our sponsors
Posted in Transportation
Last updated 08/23/2010 at 12:22 p.m. PDT

Disabled Parking Permits Appear to Be Overused

Nearly half of cars in downtown Oakland have placards

  • Text Size
  • A
  • A
  • A
By on August 20, 2010 - 11:58 a.m. PDT
Courtesy Oakland North
A sign in Downtown Oakland directing drivers to pay for parking at a kiosk.

A white pickup was parked on Broadway in downtown Oakland on Wednesday. It was there last week, too, both times with a neon yellow workman’s vest hanging behind the driver’s seat and a traffic cone sitting in the truck bed. There was also a disabled parking permit hanging from the rearview mirror, guaranteeing that this truck can stay parked at the meter indefinitely, for free.

For some people, a disabled parking permit hanging on what looks like a workman’s truck might prompt a negative reaction. Others may be more kindhearted; maybe the driver had to transport a disabled family member somewhere. Maybe it belongs to a workman who got hurt. However, a quick glance down the row of parked cars might make anyone skeptical.

Oakland North found that 44 percent of parked cars surveyed in downtown Oakland and Chinatown on Wednesday carried disabled parking placards. That’s 107 of the 245 cars that were parked on parts of Broadway, Franklin and Clay Streets, as well as Eighth through 14th streets.

That’s an exceptionally high ratio, considering that last year the California Department of Motor Vehicles granted enough placards to exempt 9 percent of the cars and trucks registered in Alameda County – about 100,000 placards – according to statistics provided by the DMV. The total number of placards in the system in California and in Alameda County have both roughly doubled in the last 10 years. The tags hang from the vehicles’ rearview mirrors, allowing drivers to park for an unlimited time at blue curbs and meters within Oakland,which otherwise cost $2 per hour.

Placard fraud costs the city income in meters and parking tickets. Furthermore, because cars bearing placards have unlimited time and don’t need to be moved every hour or two, fraud prevents parking turnover. That can severely limit parking options for everyone, disabled or not. “The parking placard needs to be of value and be there for people who need it,” said Bryon MacDonald, 64, program director for the California Work Incentives Initiative at the World Institute on Disability in downtown Oakland.

The city is also aware of this problem. “In downtown Oakland alone, several hundred vehicles displaying disabled person parking placards are parked at metered spaces on a daily basis. It appears that many drivers and/or passengers of these cars are improperly using disabled person parking placards issued by the DMV,” wrote the city administrator’s office in a statement issued November 2009. The statement said that the City Council estimated fraud costs Oakland $150,000 in yearly parking revenue.

But it can be hard to tell when placards are being fraudulently used. “When you open the hood on this issue, there are more issues,” warned MacDonald about looking into the legitimacy of placard users. He’s an amputee with a wooden foot. “When I wear long pants, no one has a clue that I’m an amputee or have a disability,” MacDonald said. He’s worried that people might mistakenly believe legitimately disabled drivers or passengers are illegally using placards. Those with chronic fatigue or a mental disability, like a fear of crowds or tight places, have symptoms invisible to strangers, he noted.

Furthermore, MacDonald wondered about Oakland North’s counting, pointing out that many people pay to park in private lots downtown, but anyone with a disabled placard would choose only to park on the street, where it’s free. “The street parking nets a disproportionate share of placards,” he said.

Nonetheless, the city of Oakland has acknowledged widespread placard fraud in recent years, a direct result of the increasing cost of parking in some neighborhoods.

Yet Oakland police have cited only a handful of drivers for improperly using the placards since last July. Improper placard use is a misdemeanor that requires a court appearance and can result in a fine of a few hundred dollars. Three police stings netted 29 violators since July, 2009, about 35 percent of the 83 people who were questioned.

The stings are roughly four hours long and involve officers stopping placard users seen entering or exiting cars and asking them for identification proving that the placard belongs to them, according to Jeff Thomason, an Oakland police spokesman.

Most of the fraud is misuse by a family member of the legitimate placard holder or a person using an expired placard, Thomason said. However, the police can’t address the question of whether there’s fraud in the DMV application process. It turns out, neither can the California DMV.

The DMV requires a doctor or certain approved medical staff– this can be a nurse practitioner or chiropractor, for example – to sign the form that the applicant sends in. The DMV doesn’t require those missing limbs to have a doctor’s note; they may merely appear in person at their local DMV office. However, the DMV doesn’t have the staff to double check the roughly 2.5 million placards issued in California or call medical professionals back to verify signatures, according to Jan Mendoza, a DMV spokesperson. Also, the DMV can’t scrutinize whether someone needs a placard. That’s for medical staff to decide, Mendoza said. She said it’s up to individual cities and counties to prosecute fraud.

Pursuing any kind of fraud costs money and could give people a negative perception of the disabled, but there are other ways to address the proliferation of placards. Oakland doesn’t have to allow unlimited free parking to the disabled at meters.

“It’s a nice benefit, but I don’t necessarily need free parking,” said Susan Henderson, director of the Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund in Berkeley. She said that it would be possible to give a time limit – perhaps four hours instead of the regular two – or make disabled people pay for parking, as is done in other cities.

Henderson immediately amended that by saying that the eliminating the free parking might be detrimental to disabled people who are in a tight financial situation. “People who need free or reduced cost would be dismayed,” she said.

“You don’t want to wreck the whole program because there’s some fraud going on,” Henderson cautioned. She said that what really irks disabled people is a car without a placard parked illegally in a blue spot.

peewee herman
peewee herman
wrote on 08/20/2010 at 12:13 p.m. PDT

woohoo, a crash blossom headline!

Zoe Corneli
Zoe Corneli
wrote on 08/20/2010 at 2:46 p.m. PDT

Thanks for the sharp eyes. We've adjusted the headline.

R T
R T
wrote on 08/20/2010 at 5:44 p.m. PDT

I have never understood why being disabled entitles one to free parking and no time limits- access to a disabled space up front- sure- makes sense- seems to be sterotypical to just assume that handicapped need free parking.

Christopher Pederson
Christopher Pederson
wrote on 08/21/2010 at 9:04 p.m. PDT

It's my understanding that state law prohibits local governments from requiring disabled persons to pay parking meter fees. (See Cal. Vehicle Code section 22511.5.) That's too bad. Walking around downtown San Francisco, I routinely see numerous luxury vehicles displaying handicapped placards parked for free. People who can afford a new Lexus or Mercedes Benz can surely afford to pay for parking, too, even in downtown San Francisco. Of course, many people who are disabled have limited income, so maybe there's a legitimate reason to allow them to park for free, but that'd most likely be open to the same kind of pervasive abuse that plagues the current system.

Tizzie Lish
Tizzie Lish
wrote on 08/20/2010 at 11:49 p.m. PDT

Being disabled should not give someone a free pass for unlimited free street parking. If the disabled is low income -- many drivers have low income and are still expected to pay for their parking -- they can travel very, very cheaply on public transit and pay nothing to park. A disabled person can get a monthly AC Transit pass for twenty bucks a month: no parking fees.

I used to live in Minneapolis. They require the disabled to pay to park at all meters, like everyone else. Minneapolis had lots of fifteen minute parking spaces to make it possible for customers to reach businesses to run quick errands and then the disabled would park in those fifteen minute spots for free and all day long, keeping customers from access to businesses. Once the city started charing parking meter fees -- and limiting the disabled to the same time limits as everyone else -- parking greatly improved for all overnight.

Tizzie Lish
Tizzie Lish
wrote on 08/20/2010 at 11:50 p.m. PDT


If you think it's bad in Oakland, drive down Bancroft, beginning at College Ave and go up to Shattuck: I think the percentage of cars with disabled stickers is much higher than the 44% the writers found in downtown Oakland. It looks like every possible person with a job or classes at UC have finagled free parking passes, also known as disabled permits.

It's just not right to give the disabled free, unlimited parking. Just because someone is disabled does not mean they have a lifetime pass to special freebies.

And, btw, I am disabled, eligible for a disabled parking designation from the DMV. I know quite a lot of disabled people and I know that there is deep, widespread abuse of this parking freebie and the abuse is rarely done by people who are disabled --

The problem would evaporate instantly if the disabled had to obey parking meter rules.

Jennifer Lemus
Jennifer Lemus
wrote on 08/21/2010 at 7:53 a.m. PDT

It's simple, link the disabled placard to the vehicle's license, and print it largely on the card. This will allow cops to verify that the card belongs to vehicle and hasn't been loaned out, without having to witness the person park. It won't stop all cases of fraud (people can still borrow the disabled person's card) but it will make fraud harder.

NanG
NanG
wrote on 08/21/2010 at 11:09 a.m. PDT

So what else is new? If I recall correctly, an article in the Chron some years ago found there were five times more disabled parking permits in San Francisco than in New York City. So what is NYC doing that we are not doing? Why aren't the legitimately disabled more concerned about the fraudulent use of the placards? Like the area surveyed in Oakland, the Jackson Square area in San Francisco appears to have the same problem, including construction workers, but to a higher degree. What percentage of those with placards request replacements because their's are stolen or lost? I should think that some old-fashioned style investigation into the qualification and distribution process would require much less manpower and could identify the most blatant loopholes in the system. But then you have to deal with all of those fat attorneys who make their living off of the ADA.

gregoryhhh
gregoryhhh
wrote on 08/22/2010 at 8:41 p.m. PDT

The owner of the company I worked for drove a Rolls Royce and had a disabled parking sticker in order to get better parking, NOT because he was in any way disabled. Just rich and fortuitous.

Andrew Ferguson
Andrew Ferguson
wrote on 08/23/2010 at 11:25 a.m. PDT

Parking is at a premium around here, hence the scurrilous use of disabled placards.

It will get more so as time goes by, because of new planning and zoning regs which allows for less than 1-1 parking (one off-street parking place required for one unit of housing).

The new rules now state that builders can get by with less - much less in some cases - such as providing *zero* off-street parking.

The common political fallacy states that "if we do not build it (parking), they will not come (residents with cars)."

One only has to look at the cars parked bumper-to-bumper at the curb and loaded with disabled placards in older neighborhoods such as the Mission and Russian Hill which were largely built with little or no parking to prove this wrong.

Mr. G
Mr. G
wrote on 08/23/2010 at 12:22 p.m. PDT

Assuming that a real doctor is signing off on these disabled permits, why are they not prosecuted when they allow a non-disabled person to get one?