San Francisco , CA 94117, 94110, 94107, 94103, 94133
San Francisco residents are outraged that city officials are planting deceptive stories in the press, ignoring the will of the people, and congratulating themselves for a job well done. Companies are where the SFMTA installed their SFpark meters and more businesses have promised to follow.
There are multiple warnings of SFparks excessive costs and minimal transportation benefits, yet its political promoters push blindly on as if nothing were amiss. SFpark specifically sold the public a bill of goods that their variable rate parking meters would improve air quality, decrease circling, improve Muni on-time performance, or make it easier to park. After spending $40+ Million Dollars, the SFMTA cannot provide any tangible evidence that the SFpark pilot has accomplished a shrapnel of what was promised to taxpayers.
SFpark Final report for the US Department of Transportation and The Obama Administration
At a time when many San Franciscans confront a growing affordability gap—why is our city government artificially inflating parking prices? The last thing city residents need are artificially inflated parking rates that will make it even MORE EXPENSIVE to live and work in San Francisco.
Between March 1, 2012 and Feb. 28, 2013, the number of eviction notices filed with the San Francisco Rent Board jumped 26 percent compared to the previous year.
Our elected leaders should be focused on issues like public safety, homelessness, education, keeping our streets and parks clean, and addressing the housing affordability gap. Instead they’re focused on driving up consumer prices and a taxing everything from street parking to sugar in beverages.
Here in San Francisco, we pay some of the highest property, sales, income, school district, and city taxes in the country. We shouldn’t be asked to pay even more—and certainly not until city officials come up with better ways to use the tax dollars they already have.
The latest figures from the city show that City Hall is already bringing in $247,349,190 A YEAR from parking tickets, traffic tickets, red light cameras, gas taxes, vehicle license fees, parking meters, and the many city-owned parking lots. And there's the $84 million a year in sales taxes that the SFCTA rakes in to maintain city streets.
In 2003 - Proposition K generated roughly 2.5 BILLION (over a 30 year period) for "20 programs such as street resurfacing, signs and signals, traffic calming, and transit enhancements.
In 2007 - Proposition A, another ballot measure generated ANOTHER $31 million in revenue. We later found out that $134,536 paid a plumber. $91,478 paid a gardener. Five custodians were paid $397,764 A secretary $93,155. Six general laborers took at total of $533,100.
In 2011 - Proposition B the Road Repaving & Street Safety Bond generated another $248 million for pedestrian, bicycle, & transit projects.
The Hundreds of millions of dollars that have been poured into wasteful streetscape projects and congestion pricing schemes would have already built a world class transit system if the city had effective management.
Here are a few reasons why San Franciscans oppose the expansion of the SFpark Pilot
#1. The SFpark App never delivered on its promise
to make easier to find a parking space!
"After fruitlessly trying to use the SFpark app to find a spot for 45 minutes, she eventually gave up and found one the old fashioned way."
- CBS News
******************Highlights from the Video*********************
"It makes more sense to drive around and look for a parking space"
"We are lost"
"Trying to use the phone while you are driving around"
"In the end we found our own spots"
"The device didnt help us"
"I dont know that I need an app for this, an app would be great if it worked."
"We drove around for 45 Minutes and struggled"
"As for finding street parking, It was very cumbersome, it didnt work for us"
#2. The expensive battery powered Ground Sensors
stopped working long before the end of the pilot!
The following letter is circulating from the SFMTA, the Parent of SF Park.
The San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA), the agency that manages transportation in the city, established the SFpark pilot, using new technology and policies to improve parking in San Francisco. The pilot aims to reduce traffic by helping drivers find parking spaces more quickly. More parking availability makes streets less congested and safer. Improved parking meters that accept credit and debit cards and phone payment reduce frustration and parking citations.
The SFMTA and the U.S. Department of Transportation are both now preparing to evaluate the pilot using data collected during the pilot project. As the pilot phase comes to a close in 2014, the project will continue to operate and any major changes will be considered after evaluation is completed in Spring 2014. In the meantime, there will be some changes to the SFpark mobile app and the data feed that some other private parking mobile apps also use.
As of January 1st, 2014, the parking sensors in the street will be turned off and their data feed will no longer be available as parking sensor batteries have reached the end of their useful lives. This means that the real-time information on parking space occupancy will not be available for mobile apps and similar uses. The SFpark data feed and app will continue to show meter parking rates, as well as real-time space availability and rates at parking garages. The SFMTA will continue to conduct demand-responsive rate changes to find the lowest rates possible to help ensure there is a minimum number of open parking spaces on each block to reduce circling and double-parking.
"The device, called a “bump,” which is battery operated, was
intended to last for five to 10 years without service."
The critical part of this scheme is to the "alleged" success of the program to make it appear that motorists are "flocking to areas with pricey parking". Mislead the public, and the Department of Transportation into believing that residents just *LOVE* the new program, expand it citywide, so that you can collect more Federal Funding and use the Taxpayers like an ATM machine.
High prices at the meters push the traffic to adjacent neighborhoods, and newly metered parking garages so that it looks like the program has relieved traffic congestion. A good example (pictured above) 5th & Brannan street 1 year after City Hall installed the new parking meters. It's another one of those artificially induced parking "blackouts" that are happening across the city. These parking spaces priced at $3.00 an hour have been empty for over a year. Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away. They were simply priced out to a new locations across the city.
City officials say to "Look before you leave" but that defeats the purpose of using the SFpark App because by the time you get there,the parking situation changes again. What is the point of having real time data if you are not going to use it in real time? So now people are driving around the city with their faces buried in their smartphones trying to find a new space to park. Americans are seeing the First-Hand Dangers of Driving while distracted and a recent study from Nationwide Insurance says more than one in four Americans who download apps admit to using those apps while driving. read more SF Collectively Mocks Parking App!
As we understand it the SFpark program goal is to have at least one free space on every block, and strives for 80% parking occupancy and 15% available spaces. This unrealistic goal is virtually impossible to acheive, particularily, in congested areas where people are already waiting for a parking space. The moment someone pulls out of a parking space the waiting, or circling car will take its place. Drivers will then be forced to go back to their smart phone to find the next available parking space.If you are looking at a smartphone and not at the road, bad things can happen (especially in SF) where you have lots of pedestrians and bike messengers and trucks. How exactly does this fit with the state and national efforts to combat distracted driving? The SFpark Smartphone App is extremely dangerous to use while driving on the busy streets of San Francisco.
#4. SFpark discriminates against seniors and the disability
community who drive, and don't own smart phones
There is a digital divide in San Francisco and aging and disabled residents should not need to own a computer, visit a website, or need a smartphone app, with a $100.00 monthly data plan to park near their homes. The SFpark program actively discriminates against seniors and the disability community which is a violation of their civil rights.
"The ethical question for the SFMTA, raised by these findings, is whether the agency's strategy for budget balancing should be based on technological barriers and the resulting parking tickets issued. That just doesn't seem right or fair."
Michael G. Pappas
Executive Director of San Francisco Interfaith Council
SFIC "TRANSIT TECHNOLOGY SURVEY" RESULTS REVEAL DIGITAL DIVIDE
March 11, 2014 - Results of the "Transit Technology Survey" conducted by the San Francisco Interfaith Council (SFIC) challenge a core SF Municipal Transit Agency (SFMTA) policy assumption and call into question whether all San Franciscans have equal access to City services.
Disseminated by the SFIC to its 3,200 e-subscribers from February 5-26, 2014, congregation leaders were asked to make hard copies and administer the survey at the fellowship hour of their primary worship service to ensure that all in attendance could participate. Completed forms were returned to the SFIC by post, compiled, tabulated and analyzed.
Twenty-three congregations in all but one supervisorial district participated. 601 congre-gants from eleven faith traditions responded. 67% of respondents travel to worship by automobile; 19% by public transit; 2% by bicycle and 12% walk.
Of the 558 who responded to the "age range" demographic question, 2.5% fell into the 18-24 age range; 12.5% in the 25-33 age range; 16% in the 34-44 age range; 20% in the 45 -54 age range, 25% in the 55 -65 age range; and 24% in the 66 or older age range.
Of those surveyed, only 17% claimed to have downloaded and use the SFMTA "Pay by Phone" application. SFIC Executive Director Michael Pappas commented, "Congregation leaders who conducted the survey credit this dramatic disparity to the reality that many congregants lack the technical aptitude to download and utilize applications. They also expressed concern that, as a result, more elderly and linguistically challenged congregants did not have equal access to City services, particularly in more vulnerable neighborhoods."
19% of respondents expressed interest in learning more about SFMTA programs that promote options to take MUNI, bike and walk to worship services.
Pappas concluded "The interfaith community wholeheartedly supports multimodal transpor-tation, biking, walking and taking transit to worship services. The ethical question for the SFMTA, raised by these findings, is whether the agency's strategy for budget balancing should be based on technological barriers and the resulting parking tickets issued. That just doesn't seem right or fair."
#5. SFpark is a big F*ck You to low income people of
color and why Ultra-Rich Techies LOVE the program
SFpark favors the wealthiest residents of the city and penalizes poorer, working class citizens who have less money and education. SFpark artificially inflates the cost of street parking so that only the wealthiest residents can park close to their destination. Low income and working class people have to public transit or park blocks away from their intended destination where parking is slightly cheaper. Is there a better way for San Francisco City Hall to engineer social and economic inequality?
The black community has been decimated by an ongoing pattern of marginalization by city leaders. The median income of black households in San Francisco is $30,840, whereas it exceeds $50,000 for all other racial groups.
has only added to the decline of San Franciscos black population. What is San Francisco City Halls solution to address the affordability gap? To make it more expensive and less affordable for low income people of color to live and work in the city.
It's apparent that the African-American community in San Francisco has no advocates in the public sector regarding this issue," NAACP members told the Coalition of Aging and Disabled Motorists. "No one seems to want to confront one of the most blatant and visible forms of discrimination affecting African-Americans in San Francisco.
The 1970 Black population of “everyone’s favorite city” was a hundred thousand, according to city records. The latest census says Blacks account for just under 47,000 of the city’s 825,000 people. 2010 US Census data says that the number of Blacks living in San Francisco has now dropped to 3.9 percent.
"Cost of living is blamed for Blacks leaving but, as a longtime resident, I am skeptical. This has been going on for more than 40 years. I see cleverly camouflaged racism, a condescending attitude towards Black residents, disrespect and a pattern of marginalization coming from City Hall as the root causes of so many to pack up and leave. Unless a Black person is willing to move to San Francisco and contribute to reversing the current trend of disrespect for Blacks by city leaders, I say don’t do it!"
SFpark pilot areas were turned into paid parking lots for the wealthiest residents in San Francisco. Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away. They were simply priced out to a new locations across the city.
Parking is one of the last places where it is first come, first served, and everyone is equal. Whether you drive an $80,000 car, an $800 car, or a scooter, you have an equal chance. If these increases happen, the haves and the have-mores will get the great public spots, and the waitress with two children will have to walk 7 blocks in the rain because she can’t possibly afford $48-$144 per day for a parking spot.
Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away. They were simply priced out to new locations across the city. SFpark pilot areas were turned into paid parking lots for the wealthiest residents in San Francisco. Working class families in Latino and Black neighborhoods were mostly ignored by both City Hall and the SFMTA.
Ms.Brinkman...The colored folks in San Francisco are complaining
that they cant afford to park on the streets.
"Oh Fiddle Dee Dee! You tell those silly Negroes that the streets
belong to the white people. We stole them fair and square from the
Indians and we can charge what we want. Now get back in that
kitchen and cook me some pancakes!"
#6. The outcome of the SFpark Pilot had already been
decided and the trial and evaluation were nothing
much more than formalities
The city originally promoted SFpark as a trial but it was clear that transportation officials had plans to roll it out citywide because the outcome was decided back in 2010.
"Although San Francisco promotes this project as a trial that will run for two years and then be evaluated, that doesn’t seem to be the whole story. After the trial period, officials plan to roll out the project citywide, rather suggesting that the outcome has already been decided and the trial and evaluation are nothing much more than formalities."
#7. SFpark transfers public debt on to private citizens by
forcing us to take on more high interest credit card debt
The Great Recession was exacerbated by the fact too many Americans were in debt and living on credit. SFparks ’biggest selling point: they accept credit and debit cards.
So lets put this into perspective:
City Hall has found a fabulous way to transfer public debt on to private citizens by forcing us to take on more increased taxes, higher prices, and high interest credit card debt. Privatize profits, socialize losses and call it "market rate" pricing. It is quite simply the evil of two lessers. How much less congestion would there be if the city simply re-invested revenue from parking meters back into the construction of parking garages?
"Every credit card for a credit card company is like a lottery ticket. It's the person who can just barely make it, who's lost a job, who's having trouble finding another job, diligently tries to pay, and struggles to pay. Boy, that's the one you want. And that's the one you want hit with 29 percent interest. Those are staggering profitable accounts. This could be the next one that really delivers the tough blow to the middle class. The one from which I don't know if they recover."
Elizabeth Warren - Harvard Law Professor and expert on debt and the middle class
#8.The Reality of living with SFpark across the city
Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away
they were simply priced out to new locations across the city.
Is this a neighborhood with "significant parking demand" or a clumsy government attempt to raid a captive parking market? Its another one of those artificially induced parking "blackouts" that are happening across the city. One of the many SFpark areas with no storefronts, no cars, and "artificially inflated" prices at the meters.
Guess which side of this street has brand new parking meters and which side doesn’t? (Yeah, I know it looks like street cleaning day, but it’s not.) Its another one of those artificially induced parking "blackouts" that are happening across the city. Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away. They were simply priced out to a new locations across the city.
5th and Townsend Street another neighborhood with "significant parking demand?". There's no circling, or cruising for parking here. Its another one of those artificially induced parking "blackouts" that are happening across the city.
Its another one of those artificially induced parking "blackouts" that are happening across the city. This one on Bryant Street. Do these streets look like they have congestion challenges? Someone made some some money from this fiasco. Too bad its not the local merchants.
So who's been looking out for the citizens interest? Its certainly not the seven-member SFMTA Board of Directors, or the special interest groups who are trying to force their radical car-free agenda on to the hardworking citizens of San Francisco. San Franciscos public transit system is the slowest in the nation because of poor governance and not because of private automobiles.
City Planners and the Bicycle lobby have a shared solution to fix the San Franciscos public transit system.
"Give us more money".
SFparks "Job Killing" Parking Meters Drive out companies in Pilot areas as Mayor Ed. Lee's popularity nosedives to its lowest number in history. Outraged San Francisco residents are mostly ignored by City Hall.
#9. The Public perception of the SFpark - Price Gouging,
Market Manipulation, and artificially inflating prices
During the California energy crisis ENRON was allowed to price-gouge at will. The "Death Star" group of scams played on the market rules which required the state to pay "congestion fees" to alleviate congestion on major power lines.
"Congestion fees" were a variety of financial incentives aimed at ensuring power providers solved the congestion problem. But in the Death Star scenario, the congestion was entirely illusory and the congestion fees would therefore simply increase profits.
One of the primary goals of the SFpark program was to help ease traffic congestion by speeding up buses and streetcars. After spending $40+ Million dollars of Taxpayer money on SFpark, Muni's on-time performance fell to their lowest numbers in history leaving passengers stranded, or waiting over 40% of the time. A 2012 investigation by SF Weekly argued that Muni has systematically neglected upkeep for years and many of the Muni on time problems are the result of management failures and inefficient processes.
The enduring legacy of SFpark can be summed up in one word: Propaganda. The people behind SFpark have been fixated on their public relations campaigns, constantly churning out press releases and slick PR videos as if they were a Hollywood studio. Following in the footsteps of ENRON, the SFpark program was built on imagination, media hype, and "rigging the market" to CASH IN on California taxpayers.
#10. San Francisco is in the midst of an affordability crisis,
and the SFpark Program is adding to the problem.
Rising costs of living, escalating rents, impending evictions and whats City Hall doing? Using the full strength of government power to prey on their own citizens.
San Francisco is in the midst of an affordability crisis, and the SFpark program is adding to the problem. San Francisco's tech boom brought thousands of new residents and soaring home prices to the city, but it's also triggered an exponential increase in evictions. Between March 1, 2012 and Feb. 28, 2013, the number of eviction notices filed with the San Francisco Rent Board jumped 26 percent compared to the previous year. The last thing struggling city residents need are artificially inflated parking rates that will make it even MORE EXPENSIVE to live and work in San Francisco.
The SFpark Program did not create new parking spaces out of thin air. SFpark took the same spaces that were always available to the public and priced them out of reach for low income motorists. Then, the program created a new generation of $100,000 city workers and contractors to manage the whole scheme. Circling, double parking, and traffic congestion – did not go away, they were simply priced out to new locations across the city.
Where is the separation of powers when a government agency is allowed to create, enforce, and profit from their own predatory parking policies? San Francisco City Hall and the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency (SFMTA) say the goal of having parking meters and raising the rates to as much as 6 dollars per hour (18 dollars per hour for special events) is to create easier parking by improving availability.
Don't forget to thank San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, and the Board of Supervisors for ignoring the will of the people on election day!
And Hey, UCLA Professor Donald Shoup!
Is this kind of thing that you call “responsible parking management?” Price Gouging, Market Manipulation, and Artificially Inflating Consumer Prices?
Copyright 2013 SFpark.info All rights reserved.
The website SFpark.info is not affiliated with the San Francisco Municipal Transit Agency, The Eastern Neighborhoods United Front (ENUF), The SF Auto Jobs Alliance, or the Municipal SFpark Project. We are a Grassroots Coalition of Aging and Disabled Motorists who oppose the roll out of the SFPark program in San Francisco. We represent private citizens, business owners, senior citizens, and persons with disabilities. We are residents from every economic status and cultural identity represented in the diverse city of San Francisco.
INFORMATION DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed on SFpark.info are soley those of the original authors and other contributors. This information is provided ‘as is’, and we accept no liability for its accuracy.
San Francisco , CA 94117, 94110, 94107, 94103, 94133