Parking Permits

ParkingPolicyWe contend that SFMTA is out of control and needs to be stopped. This video explains how unelected SFMTA officials changed street parking legislation while claiming they were “simplifying and clarifying” the language. It is important to understand this process because other unelected government bodies are attempting to do the same thing. We feel the best way to stop these practices is for our elected supervisors to hold public hearings to investigate them.f you agree with us, please sign the petition to Restore Parking Oversight of SFMTA.

This Video exposes how the SFMTA staff misled the public, and their own Board of Directors to exploit the citizens of San Francisco

In 2007, the citizens of San Francisco gave SFMTA authority to manage and update City parking policies, without ongoing oversight from the Board of Supervisors. But the supervisors can assume more authority if enough of them agree to take it on. We want to convince them that they need to do that.

SFMTA published the ‘Policies for On-Street Parking Management’ document in order to “provide transparency in how the agency makes decisions.” The agency promised the document contained “no new policies” and only clarified “where we do (and do not) use parking meters and residential parking permits.” Public data, internal emails, and dissenting staff memos prove otherwise.

SFMTA staff misled their own Board of Directors and violated the public trust by creating all new policies that favor parking meters over residential parking permits. These new policies include moving forward with neighborhood plans, denying residential parking permit requests, adding parking meters, and removing existing residential parking permit areas. These new policies use zoning, and not citizen input to justify the installation of new parking meters. 

Parking meters, as most people know, are a multimillion dollar cash cow for the city of San Francisco. Mixed use, and high density areas like North Beach, Mission  and Chinatown are areas that have residential parking permits in place. The new parking policies that the SFMTA claims are existing policies will enable the SFMTA to remove residential parking permit areas and replace them all with parking meters (without citizen input or approval). These new parking policies will also allow the SFMTA to preemptively install variable rate parking meters in areas that are zoned mixed use (production, distribution, repair) and high density areas like SOMA, Potrero Hill, and Mission Bay.

How much money will the city generate from mixed use and high density neighborhoods? Millions? More like billions! And what if you don’t want your mixed use, or high density neighborhood to be turned into a paid parking lot?  Sorry,  SFMTA policies say that your neighborhood is already zoned for parking meters and according to SFMTA’s “existing policies” your neighborhood should already have parking meters instead of residential parking permits (rpp).  

Even after appeals from 20+ neighborhood and business associations and the agency’s Citizen Advisory Committee to rescind the policies, the SFMTA Board has taken no action. The Board of Supervisors must step in to provide oversight and accountability.  


San Francisco Keep Corporate Greed Out of Your Parking Spaces:

Share on. facebook


 

Advertisements

2 thoughts on “Parking Permits

  1. I just got a note back from the survey with a letter to forward. one error in the letter… see below.
    good letter – one error – parking fines have double in the last 3 years!! in 2009 parking meter fines were 32.00 they’re now 62.00!!

    One other point – parkng revenues from meters and ticket peaked in 2006! indicating that people have changed their behavior but the number of meters and the fines continue to rise.

    http://sfappeal.com/news/2011/01/while-the-homepage-for-sfpark.php

    I have been writing a lot to my supervisor the mayor and ed reiskin… seems pretty pointless unfortunately – were like the frog in the boiling water….

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boiling_frog

    From: ENUF
    Sent: Friday, September 14, 2012 2:24 PM
    Subject: RE: Not everyone hates parking meters

    Now that you have signed the Stop SFMTA petition, make sure your voice is heard by sending a letter to the editor of the San Francisco Chronicle by clicking here. Feel free to copy and paste the letter below, or edit it as you see fit. Personal stories can help. Thank you!

    Dear Editor:

    In regards to your recent article “Not everyone hates parking meters” (Sep. 11, 2012), it’s not the meters themselves I hate, it’s SFMTA’s use of parking meters to balance its budget on the backs of this city’s rapidly diminishing lower- and middle-classes. Our parking fines are the highest in the nation and have more than doubled in the last 15 years. They tell us the revenue will go towards improving transit. I’m still waiting. Not only has MUNI not improved, it has gotten noticeably worse!

    Many of the signers of the pro-meter petition have a misconception that car drivers are using a public resource for free. Nothing could be further from the truth! My taxes and car fees support the public infrastructure, and I would be happy to pay more if fees were applied fairly across the board, not as a punitive measure by an agency that is neither transparent nor accountable.

    Parking is a prime consideration for anyone coming to this city to shop, eat, do business and visit friends. When SFMTA blithely raises parking fines in the name of transit, it is slowly but surely driving out the working class and killing our restaurants and small businesses—the economic and social lifeblood of this diverse and vibrant city.

    SFPark is an unproven experiment, and there has been no evidence, either from SFMTA or an outside third party, that it will do what SFTMA says it will do. We need an agency that works for all San Franciscans, not just a few interest groups. Please stop gouging San Franciscans. It’s not good for anybody.

    Sincerely,
    [your name]

    Like

  2. I did apply for an RPP area in my neighbourhood but it was denied because the new SF Park meters had been put in place. I had initially been told from Tom Folks (Traffic Engineering) to gather the required signatures (more than 50% of the households in that building need to sign) and then I could apply for a new area or an extension of an existing area. Since the end of Bluxome between 5th and 6th already had a permit area Tom suggested an extension instead of a new area. There are lots of grey areas with regards to extensions vs. a new area so I went with Tom suggestion. I coordinated with 77 Bluxome and got signatures from that building as well so we could have a bigger area – plus we are the only residences on Bluxome between 4th and 5th.

    Basically fill out the attached application and include the required number of signatures based on the number of units in your building. Submit the signatures to Tom Folks or Austria Marks Celeste and they will come back with some questions – number of units in the building, number of parking spots in the building etc.

    Tom was helpful but it is clear there is a disconnect between his group and the sf park group and when he went to process the application SF Park folks basically put the application on hold and then ultimately denied it on the grounds that they would note remove the meters. They completely ignored the fact that we had an RPP area at the end of our street. Ultimately that led me to Ed Reiskin and his team who were completely unresponsive and I had no choice but to show up at the hearing earlier this year to address my concerns directly. That’s where I met Rob and ultimately everyone else who was having the same problem.

    – Bluxome Street resident who was forced to move

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s