Easy fix for permit abuse

Published 5:50 pm Thursday, August 1, 2013

Sensible, thy name is not Seattle. Which is fine, except when a Seattle issue becomes a state issue. To wit: Recent news reports that the state is “looking into” abuse of disabled parking placards.

For two years, lawmakers have heard how the placards, which provide disabled drivers “with unlimited free parking in coveted spaces,” are being used illegally by scores of able-bodied drivers, The Herald’s Jerry Cornfield reported.

Wait. Apply the brakes, please. Unlimited free parking? Who gets unlimited free parking in coveted spaces? Well, people in Seattle with disabled placards do. Such a deal. No doubt well-intentioned, the exemption is simply an invitation for abuse. No one, disabled or not, is entitled to unlimited, free parking. (In Everett, where parking is free, a four-hour limit applies for disabled parking spaces.)

A 2010 study estimated that on any given day in downtown Seattle, between 30 percent and 40 percent of spaces were filled with vehicles with disabled parking permits, and at least 10 percent of those placards were inactive.

(Are those 10 percent at least being ticketed/reported for using an inactive placard? Why not?)

Lawmakers can “study” the problem all they want, but the answer is clear: Charge for disabled parking spots/meters, the same as others in the city: People can pay for two or four hours, or all day, 10 hours.

The legislative work group, however, is considering actions ranging from closer monitoring of physicians, who determine whether a driver needs a placard, to creating a system for cops and the public to know whether the placard they see is valid, Cornfield reported. The recommendations are due Dec. 1.

Closer monitoring of physicians? Really? Do lawmakers believe there is a parking-placard black market at work, fueled by unethical doctors handing them out (or selling them)?

Such scrutiny would be better applied to “creating a system for people to tell whether the placard is valid or not,” and being used by the person to whom it was issued.

But mostly, charge for parking.

It turns out that just down the road in Oregon, Portland has the exact same problem. But the city is aware of the solution, according to the Portland Tribune, which reported: “(But) new studies by national transportation experts show that the solution to Portland’s parking problem is remarkably simple: All the city has to do is require disabled drivers to pay for their parking spaces, like everybody else.”

Our legislative task force needn’t repeat the studies, just read them, and apply the insights accordingly.

It’s discriminatory to not provide parking spaces for disabled persons. It is not discriminatory to charge for parking.