San Francisco Loses Its Heart and Ignores the Needs of a Disabled Family

Tony Bennett often sang, “I lost my heart in San Francisco.” If he were still alive, he would realize that he didn’t lose his heart; San Francisco city officials lost theirs.

California’s daylighting law (Assembly Bill 413), amends the California Vehicle Code to prohibit parking or stopping within 20 feet of any marked or unmarked crosswalk on the approach side. It’s a sensible law that leaves enough wiggle room to accommodate reasonable exceptions. Unfortunately, the exemptions are only as good as the people given the power to apply them.

My History

I was attracted to San Francisco almost 40 years ago because of it’s reputation for being a compassionate city. Maybe that was “old fashioned,” but my parents instilled in me values such as these.

I accepted a position at San Francisco State University and made a self-imposed commitment to serve the city’s most vulnerable. I was honored shortly after arriving here when the Board of Supervisors asked me to serve on the Advisory Committee for Children, Adolescents, and Maternal Problems, a position I held for seven years.

When the San Francisco School District withheld services from disabled children, parents asked me to lead an effort to restore services. It took national media coverage before services were restored, the Director of Special Education was fired, and, because of the negative publicity, the District became reluctant to reduce mandated services in the future.

As a volunteer at the Zen Hospice Guest House and other end-of-life facilities for eight years, I followed a series of damning newspaper articles about the crumbling buildings that served San Francisco’s indigent, elderly, and dying population, and applauded their decision to update Laguna Honda Hospital.

And now, living with Parkinson’s, caring for two disabled family members, and serving as an Ambassador for the Parkinson’s Foundation of America, I expected to receive the same type of compassion I rendered to San Francisco’s vulnerable communities for the past 40 years. I’m still waiting.

San Francisco City Bureaucracy

Some people believe attitudinal changes occurred because of “culture” clashes: liberal vs. conservative, young vs. old, pedestrians vs commuters, etc. But other residents have a more laser-focused explanation: the gradual creation of an entrenched, uncaring bureaucracy.

I had sided with the culture-clash folks until a 20-foot strip of red paint mysteriously appeared on the curb directly in front of my house, extending almost the entire length.

I was sure it was a misinterpretation of the daylighting law. After all, my house is at the end of the block on an “L,” not at an intersection; there are no sidewalks or houses beyond it, and few people even venture to walk up the steep hill to the end of the block. In the 35 years I had lived in this house, there had never been an accident. Hardly the dangerous corner the law was targeting. Why would the city implement a rule that made no sense?

Surely it was an innocent mistake that could be corrected with a quart of gray paint. When I emailed the San Francisco Municipal Traffic Authority (SFMTA), I was told, “It’s the law. We can’t change anything.” When I cited the passage that allowed exceptions and noted that there was no sidewalk to walk on after my house, the answer was, “Read the law.” There was no response when I said that not implementing the exceptions to the law will jeopardize the health of three people, including me.”

Seeking Help

My District Supervisor’s office was more sympathetic but not encouraging; I was told the SFMTA would neither review my request nor visit the street. An email to Mayor Lurie’s office was met with a polite response saying someone would get back to me in a few days. It never happened.

A call to the San Francisco Office on Disability and Accessibility was even more distressing: Yes, they understood that the SFMTA’s decision might negatively impact my family’s health, and yes, the SFMTA’s interpretation of the law was wrong, but their office was only advisory.

When I spoke with current and retired city officials, everyone expressed genuine concern about SFMTA’s unreasonable position and frustration at wanting to help but knowing there was nothing they could do.

As I was shuffled from department to department, I learned that what I was experiencing was not an isolated indifference by just one department, possibly even one person—it was endemic within San Francisco city bureaucracy, as well as in most large cities.

The Takeaway

I have no delusions that calling attention to a city’s indifference will change the outcome of San Francisco’s “red zone” ruling, nor am I after revenge. But I’ve learned that embarrassment can be very effective when one side believes they are in a position to arbitrarily decide on significant changes. I’m sure the red paint on my curb will remain long after someone in my family has a catastrophic fall and long after I’m dead.

This article goes beyond my differences with the city. It’s about how traditional and social media exposure can be effective in changing “unchangable” positions. For example: 1) services to economically disadvantaged mothers and children were increased rather than cut when people learned what poor families were experiencing; San Francisco’s school district became reluctant to reduce services when their strategy was revealed nationally; funding was secured to rebuild Laguna Honda, our hospital for the indigent, poor, and dying when the public learned of its deplorable conditions; and access to San Francisco parks improved when local media sources revealed limited access for the disabled.

I don’t expect city officials to do anything that would reduce the impact of their decision on three people’s efforts to lead a “normal” life. But maybe my soap opera can serve as a model for what powerless classes of citizens can do when powerful bureaucrats are more interested in covering their backsides and not making waves than in caring for the needs of their city’s most vulnerable people.

Forget about my problem; think about the various powerless communities you belong to, then share this email with them. Also, I’d love to hear what you think. Add your comment below, and unlike the Mayor’s office, you’ll receive a response from me.

You’ll never know how strong your voice is until sometime in the future, when you become the target. Good luck and BE LOUD!

Preventing Senior Moments, by Stan Goldberg

A novel about guilt, forgiveness, and what it takes to die at peace with the life you lived.

8 Comments

  1. Anne Newman

    The indifference and ineptitude of bureaucracy is not particular to San Francisco. It is everywhere. To my way of thinking the solution is what I might call The Minneapolis Effect. Communities need to rally together in support of all issues (or conversely against certain issues ). The peoples’ voices, loud, clear and large, is the only hope of getting things done. I’m so sorry you are having to deal with yet another issue in your life. I wish you peace and success.

    Reply
    • Stan Goldberg

      Hi Anne (with a final “e)”,

      Thanks for you good wishes and thoughts. I guess as we get older, “Acceptance” should become easier–but as I’m sure you know, it isn’t. I’ve found that a generalized anger usually is that productive. But if you can find one spot that well-defined and immediate, you can rally the people. For example, the group of mothers I helped had very diffent social, religious, and political views. But when you say, “the services they are denying your child will make it very difficult for them to find a job.” Now that not only made this mothers angry, but from that point on, they would do whatever was necesary to get the school district to reinstate special services.

      Reply
  2. Keith Symons

    “Endemic within San Francisco city bureaucracy” pretty much sums it up. There’s a difference between the ‘letter’ of the law and the ‘spirit’ of the law, with the former often managed by people who thrive on exercising their power simply because they can. Some of those probably worry about setting a precedent of some sort if making exceptions. It’s amazing, though, what those “powerless classes of citizens” can sometimes achieve by relentless engaging in a cause. In my local township, a dedicated group challenged a big developer who was bent on taking over 300 acres of prime agricultural land to put in a solar farm. Granted that the “NIMBY” aspect was a huge factor, but bringing in various experts to present their case as to the potential environmental impacts , as well as other cogent arguments, won the day for the local folks. I didn’t expect things to go quite so easily. Now, of course, looks like we’ll be fighting data centers! I’m so sorry to hear of what happened and the degree to which it impacts your family. My dad (whom you knew well of course), was quite fond of saying “the squeaky wheel gets the grease”. As John mentioned, the politicians don’t like bad press. As Ann mentioned, people in the position to make corrective changes in cases like this often will be hesitant to do so because it’ll “make waves”. All the best to you. Soldier on.

    PS Ann…my grandfather was a Mangold from the Allentown, PA area. Interesting since it’s a name you don’t come across all that often.

    Reply
    • Stan Goldberg

      Hi Keith,

      Isn’t it interesting that what works with one group seems to work with most others: define a problem, show people how it will affect them and their family on a very personal level, wait for their anger to build, then let them loose. As for Andy’s “squeeky wheel theory,” when we were in high school, both of us along with the other crew members delighted in making everything squeek!

      Reply
  3. Ann Mangold

    Your piece should be in the Chronicle, Stan. This is classic pass-the-buck behavior. “I didn’t have anything to do with this. There’s nothing I can do. It’s not in my job description.” Maybe more to the point, “I’ll get in trouble if I make waves.”

    Reply
    • Stan Goldberg

      Thank you Ann. As you can see, I’ve never given up my activist thoughts. If you know anybody influential in traditional media, feel free to send them the article. In the meantime, tell everyone you know (and even those you don’t) to buy Major Ponds so they can see a less strident version of me. It was great seeing Keith yesterday.

      Reply
  4. John O'Grady

    That’s outrageous bureaucratic ineptness. I want to fight, but I don’t have the energy for it at the moment. Frustration! It takes a village so I hope we can bring a village to this. I know that the politicians don’t like bad press. Let’s consider shining the spotlight.

    Reply
    • Stan Goldberg

      I Agree completely John. Years ago, when I was voicing the same anger, a good friend who was an Akedo master said the principles that formed the foundation of his sport (allow the force of your opponent’s movements to defeat him. It was great advice and the shining spotlight I have always used has been my writing. Thanks for the feedback.

      Reply

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Related Posts