There is a column in our local newspaper, that in a Question and Answer (Q&A) format deals with questions about roadway conditions, vehicle code, public transportation. This question and answer appeared today.
Queen of the Road
Should disabled people have to pay to park?
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 07/27/2011 12:00:00 AM PDT
COMMUTER: Why do drivers with handicapped placards not have to pay at parking meters?
Like the rest of us, if they can afford a car, they can certainly pay the price to park as we do. And, they are all pretty low and reachable. Let's face it: At least half of the people you see emerge out of car placing a handicapped placard in its place jump out and seem to walk fine.
Marika Reisinger, San Francisco
QUEEN: Marika, you pose an interesting question, and pursuing the answer unearthed some unexpected facts. The first iteration of the law that governs disabled parking in California went into effect in 1959 and has been amended something like 20 times since then. The original wording was very narrow and specific. It granted an exemption for payment and time limits specifically for veterans who had lost their legs and the use of their hands.
The payment provision now appears in California Vehicle Code section 22511.5(a)(1)(A)(2). Because it was enacted so long ago, it's hard to find the rationale. The Queen spoke with an scholar who has studied the law closely and thinks that while providing close-in parking for disabled people is a good idea that works well, eliminating payment is not.
"The California DMV estimates that one-third of the people using placards are not disabled," said Michael Manville, a postdoctoral scholar at UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies. "The law has so much corruption that everybody suffers from it, including those with real disabilities who can't find a space because someone who is not disabled is misusing a placard and parking there all day."
Manville thinks the part of the Vehicle Code exempting placard holders from payment should be rolled back and the rest retained. He thinks it's not the close-in parking but the exemption from payment that makes fraud so tempting. Loyal Subjects, what do you think?
California DMV is in the midst of a study to figure out a way to verify that the placards are getting to and being used by people who legally need them, and then creating a mechanism for revoking or invalidating the placard when it is no longer needed or the owner of the placard has moved out of the state or died.
My first response to this Q & A is that you don't revoke a reasonable law (not requiring placard holders/users to pay for parking) to deal with the problem, you fix the problem with placard abuse. My second response is that I believe, unlike Michael Manville (the postdoctoral scholar at UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies consulted in this Q&A) that the part of the code that relieves placard holders from paying for public parking comes out of the fact that for people with disabilities (not immediately perceivable disabilities and those who use canes, walkers, crutches, wheelchairs) it takes extra time (in some cases lots of extra time) to get in and out of their vehicles and to run errands, get to and from class, etc.
I'd like to hear from all of you about this situation and incorporate your responses in a follow up letter to this column. Maybe some of you know the rationale behind the parameter of the law. Look forward to hearing from you.
All the best,
Queen of the Road
Should disabled people have to pay to park?
Contra Costa Times
Posted: 07/27/2011 12:00:00 AM PDT
COMMUTER: Why do drivers with handicapped placards not have to pay at parking meters?
Like the rest of us, if they can afford a car, they can certainly pay the price to park as we do. And, they are all pretty low and reachable. Let's face it: At least half of the people you see emerge out of car placing a handicapped placard in its place jump out and seem to walk fine.
Marika Reisinger, San Francisco
QUEEN: Marika, you pose an interesting question, and pursuing the answer unearthed some unexpected facts. The first iteration of the law that governs disabled parking in California went into effect in 1959 and has been amended something like 20 times since then. The original wording was very narrow and specific. It granted an exemption for payment and time limits specifically for veterans who had lost their legs and the use of their hands.
The payment provision now appears in California Vehicle Code section 22511.5(a)(1)(A)(2). Because it was enacted so long ago, it's hard to find the rationale. The Queen spoke with an scholar who has studied the law closely and thinks that while providing close-in parking for disabled people is a good idea that works well, eliminating payment is not.
"The California DMV estimates that one-third of the people using placards are not disabled," said Michael Manville, a postdoctoral scholar at UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies. "The law has so much corruption that everybody suffers from it, including those with real disabilities who can't find a space because someone who is not disabled is misusing a placard and parking there all day."
Manville thinks the part of the Vehicle Code exempting placard holders from payment should be rolled back and the rest retained. He thinks it's not the close-in parking but the exemption from payment that makes fraud so tempting. Loyal Subjects, what do you think?
California DMV is in the midst of a study to figure out a way to verify that the placards are getting to and being used by people who legally need them, and then creating a mechanism for revoking or invalidating the placard when it is no longer needed or the owner of the placard has moved out of the state or died.
My first response to this Q & A is that you don't revoke a reasonable law (not requiring placard holders/users to pay for parking) to deal with the problem, you fix the problem with placard abuse. My second response is that I believe, unlike Michael Manville (the postdoctoral scholar at UCLA's Institute of Transportation Studies consulted in this Q&A) that the part of the code that relieves placard holders from paying for public parking comes out of the fact that for people with disabilities (not immediately perceivable disabilities and those who use canes, walkers, crutches, wheelchairs) it takes extra time (in some cases lots of extra time) to get in and out of their vehicles and to run errands, get to and from class, etc.
I'd like to hear from all of you about this situation and incorporate your responses in a follow up letter to this column. Maybe some of you know the rationale behind the parameter of the law. Look forward to hearing from you.
All the best,
Comment