Wheelchair fight begins in San Francisco

[Mugu]

By JASON DEAREN, AP via Yahoo

SAN FRANCISCO - When Michela Alioto-Pier was an aide to Vice President Al Gore in 1992, she couldn't navigate her wheelchair in some areas of the West Wing. So she threatened to sue, and the White House improved wheelchair access.

Now a San Francisco supervisor, Alioto-Pier is running into similar trouble at City Hall, where her colleagues recently voted against a plan to lower the board president's elevated speaking dais so a ramp could be installed.

"When they voted against it, I looked at other supervisors and said 'Is this San Francisco, the most liberal city in the world?'" Alioto-Pier said. "They voted against accessibility upgrades?"

The perch is only reachable by walking up five stairs. Aaron Peskin, president of the Board of Supervisors, said he hasn't used it in three years, opting for a seat at a lower table that is wheelchair accessible. Yet he voted against making the changes sought by Alioto-Pier, saying the project's $1.1 million price tag is too much as the city faces a $338 million deficit.


Complete article at:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080408/ap_on_re_us/million_dollar_ramp

[Mojorabbit]

1. 1.1 million?

I built a ramp up five outside stairs for a wheelchair bound friend for 250 bucks.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

2. Were their homes historic landmarks..

There has to be another solution, spending 1.1 million dollars (even the 250 thousand that the claimant says it can be done for) for access to one podium is ridiculous..

[ulysses]

3. that was my first thought.

Shit. Give me a saw and some plywood. I'll charge pennies on the dollar. :)

[slampoet]

14. Same here. I have built 3 ramps and all of them cost less than $300.

Even the one with the pergo flooring.



BTW - In voting to Not make this accessible they have voted to REQUIRE themselves to have people available to CARRY this person to the podium. The Law is very clear in this matter. You MUST provide the accessibility.

[EFerrari]

4. They have to sink a podium and to do that, mess with the foundation.

The president of the board just wants to rope the podium off and use it as a diplay only since he doesn't even use it. Alioto-Pier is trying to prove a point about accessibility -- a really expensive one.

We're running a deficit right now.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

5. The Supes weren't voting against a ramp.....

they were voting against the price tag of that particular proposal -- which I agree is ridiculously high. This issue has had a lot of play in the local media -- IMO, Alioto is trying to create an issue where none really is.

[EFerrari]

10. And Newsom is right next to her. They're both rich

and couldn't care less how they spend our money. They both do this all the time - try to position themselves as populists while the cameras are going and then, whooooooosh, they're gone.

[Hell Hath No Fury]

19. Yup, you got it....

Newsom and Alioto are two of my least favorite city leaders, for a mulitude of reasons.

[El Pinko]

56. B-b-but... Isn't citywide free Wi-Fi a top priority?

Ugh.

My son went to Clarendon Elem. until 2006, just as they were beginning a handicap-accesible retrofit with elevators (as well as installing a "natural streambed & xeriscape" through the present playground blacktop to the tune of ten million dollars. There is ONE handicapped child at Clarendon (she's in a walker, not a wheelchair). It would be cheaper to hire a big burly guy at $50K per year to stand at the stairs ready to carry her up and down for DECADES. And of course, Clarendon was built in about 1960, so in another ten years or so, they'll probably declare the whole school obsolete and rebuild from the ground up, anyway.



I'm all for improving wheelchair accessibility where and when it's feasible for a reasonable amount of money, but I do fundamentally disagree with some of the premises of the ADA- which basically seems to say that society should be responsible for making just about any public space accessible to handicapped people, regardless of how heavily used that place is or how much of a need there really is. A more sensible solution would have been to require all new buildings to be wheelchair accessible, then allot a certain amount for retrofitting, with a commision assigned to find the most urgently needed places with input from disabled people - IE, places that get the most complaints about inaccessibility should be the priority for retrofitting.

[spinbaby]

6. That's not what I thought it would be

From the title of the post, I had imagined something like a demolition derby.

[emperor124]

7. I know, I was expecting two wheelchair bound people having at it.

But this is equally important. Oh wait, probably more important now that I think of it.

[hlthe2b]

9. Exactly.... I thought motorized wheelchairs had taken over SF

(Mad Max visions)...

I'm all for accessibility, but there has to be a less costly solution... Geez...

[Gormy Cuss]

8. It's not a million dollar ramp. It's a fight between supes.

This from C.W. Nevius's column last month in the SF Chronicle (Matier & Ross also had a column with similar info)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/03/18/BA95VLJ8J.DTL&hw=Alioto+Pier+ramp&sn=002&sc=226

This is another case of those bickering supes. Because if the six supervisors who voted against building the wheelchair ramp wanted to stop it, they had ample time months ago. And they didn't say peep.

"I went around to each of the supervisors' offices and asked 'Do you want to weigh in on this?' " said Susan Mizner, director of the Mayor's Office on Disability. "And with a couple of exceptions they said, 'whatever.' And then I went to their aides right before this vote and asked if they wanted more information. And most of them didn't want anything. So to say now that they'd like more discussion is a little disingenuous."

(snip)


"A friend of my husband's said the other day, 'Tom, it's a million dollars,' " Alioto-Pier said. "It is not a million dollar ramp!"

And it isn't. A third of the money would pay for the ramp, using traditional wood and construction techniques, another third goes to taking up the floor and removing asbestos, and the rest to upgrade the sound system. Those last two projects will have to be done anyhow and are only tied to the ramp by timing. ...

[kimmylavin]

11. A third of a million dollars is still ridiculous.

Especially with the information that it would be built "using traditional wood and construction techniques".

What kind of high-end Mafia contractors would they be using, anyway???

[Gormy Cuss]

13. That may be, but it doesn't have the same punch as calling it a million dollar ramp, does it?

As has been mentioned above, this is in a landmark building and no one would approve a cheap plywood ramp for it. That means there needs to be a design approval ($$) before any work is done, installation of higher cost materials to complement the design of the room. Adding the higher than average wage scale in this area to those costs and that third of a million doesn't seem so high anymore.


Sup. Peskin has a low cost solution and if it meets the test of reasonable accommodation it would safe the city money. Alioto-Pier contends that it isn't.

[Lance_Boyle]

12. She's stirring up shit for shit's sake. And an ego stroke.

"Peskin said he supports legislation that would permanently make the upper president's podium off limits.

'The president's podium would be a remnant of an earlier time in history,' he said.

But Alioto-Pier and disability rights groups say abandoning the president's podium misses the point that wheelchair users should have access to the elevated perch just like everyone else has throughout the city's history."

She's turning down a perfectly reasonable (and free to implement) proposal that delivers equality, and insisting that the city spend hundreds of thousands of dollars unnecessarily. See how long she retains her elected position if she makes taxpayers pony up like that to stroke her ego.

[slampoet]

15. Stirring shit like Brown VS Board of Education.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

17. Horse crap

B vs BOE was dealing with *real damage* to many people *everywhere* in the united states! This is one person who wants access to one podium and wants the tax payers to shell out more than a quarter million dollars (and mess with a historical site) so she can stroke her ego.

Meanwhile someone else said it should be treated like an historical artifact and roped off, lets use a lower table that *everyone* can access...

Now if this were say access to the government building (or chamber) as a whole I should completely agree it needs to be rectified but sometimes when dealing with disability access you have to look for the good that is possible and not the perfect that is not..

[slampoet]

53. Ego damage was part of BROWN

Or don't you recall the second class citizen component?

[EFerrari]

20. No, not really. She's no more really interested in this issue

than Newsom is interested in gay marriage. It's fakery. Something good may come out of it, but watch how fast she dances away when the press stops.

[slampoet]

54. She won't dance you idiot.

Nice way to slur someone in a chair.

[EFerrari]

55. Take your fake outrage to someone who will fall for it.

Thanks.

Alioto has consistently sided with money over people. I can't wait until she's voted out.

eta: And you might want to change your user name from poet to literalist.

[slampoet]

57. I worked as a PCA for six years.

My outrage is as real as your bigotry.

[EFerrari]

59. See above. n/t

[bean fidhleir]

16. Not necessarily. Declaring it off-limits is not a permanent solution

Some new muckamuck could decide to declare it on-limits again - and it still wouldn't be accessible.

Now, if they *removed* it altogether, that would be a permanent solution. But metaphorically stretching a string across the railings? Not good enough.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

18. I dont see why not

Sure were running a debt but lets just spend a quarter million dollars so one person can access a podium that *nobody uses*!!!

Now if some new 'muckamuck' comes and tears the rope down you can deal with it then, hell you might not even be in the red to start with when that happens..

[EFerrari]

21. That much money could provide real access for a lot of people

not no access for anyone so Alioto-Pier can get some PR.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

24. I agree

lets take 250K and find somewhere where many people need to access thats lacking. Hell lets put that into programs for the homeless or, here is an idea, lets try not to run in the red..

[EFerrari]

25. OMFG! We agreed on something!

:rofl:

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

26. Meh, broken clock

;)

[EFerrari]

27. LOL!

[bean fidhleir]

22. Fine. Then remove it altogether.

The solution needs to be a permanent one, not one that can be turned on and off like a tap depending on the arrogance of some administration.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

23. Yea lets destroy a historical piece of the city

to make one person happy.. Talk about arrogance..

[bean fidhleir]

28. "Destroy a historical piece of the city" Hyperventilate much?

Someone reading that would think I'd advocated razing a five-block area.

I'm talking about c-a-r-e-f-u-l m-o-d-i-f-i-c-a-t-i-o-n, not vandalism.

Even Stradivari violins, that sell for millions of dollars apiece, undergo modernization. If those works of art can be modified to meet modern needs, so can a lousy room in a *public* building.

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

30. "Fine. Then remove it altogether."

Ripping something out is a modification?

[bean fidhleir]

32. "Ripping something out is a modification?"

You do have a way with words, don't you. Yes, of course I mean getting out the clawhammers and prybars and levering it up, splintering as much as possible of course and perhaps even sawing halfway through the supporting beams for good measure. After which the hole should be rudely filled in with A-D plywood (D side up) and left unpainted.

Or, I suppose, if it wouldn't hurt your feelings too much, it could be carefully removed and the gap filled with matching flooring in the same way Stradivari violins have had their original heads cunningly grafted onto new necks.

[XemaSab]

36. Violins are modified with PRIVATE money

not public money.

What do you think about paying someone $100 to lift her up there every time she wants to use the podium? :shrug:

[DadOf2LittleAngels]

51. I think the fact nobody uses that podium shows your argument

for the red herring appeal to emotion that it is..

[XemaSab]

52. Are you replying to the right person?

:shrug:

I think I appealed more to common sense than to emotion there. :P

[EFerrari]

29. Why does it need to be permanent?

Shouldn't it be functional and fair?

Newsom, with his usual fiscal wisdom, is all for this expensive statement that will benefit no real person. Thank goodness a majority of our supervisors have better sense.

[bean fidhleir]

31. I think it needs to be permanent so that it can't be made a football

The law is clear that people can't be made second-class citizens (or not more than they already are) because of some limitation for which adaptation can be made.

I really can't understand why it's even an issue. It's not as though this is equivalent to razing the building and putting up a new one to please the only person who will ever be a wheelchair-user. Whatever is done will be used in future, too, unless there's some major medical breakthrough or a huge regression in political consciousness.

[EFerrari]

33. It's an issue because this project will benefit no one,

because we are running a deficit, and because a lot of our people really do need better access. That's why.

[bean fidhleir]

34. You're too young to remember, but 35 years ago women were kept out

of occupations because "there are no bathroom facilities". Why weren't there any bathroom facilities? Because there is no need. What about the women applying for the job? Can't hire them because there are no bathroom facilities. Rinse and repeat.

Can you imagine how completely infuriating it was to hear that circular argument being advanced by some smirking man? This issue is different only in detail.

[EFerrari]

35. In fact, I'm not too young to remember

and this podium is disenfranchising no one.

It's a misapplied argument for the PR benefit of Alioto and Newsom.

I do understand want. I've worked with homeless advocates in this city for years.

This is just a stunt and a shameful one when so many people have real needs that aren't being addressed.

[bean fidhleir]

38. My apologies - I thought you were in your 40s.

Let's take it down to the basics: it's the law.

The law doesn't require a disabled person to be nice before they are worthy of being accommodated. Even grandstanding assholes deserve accommodation, if they have an accommodatable disability. There's no requirement that any specific solution be implemented, but "get lost" does not qualify as a solution within the meaning of the act.

So, given that both the law and, I would like to think, sheer human fellow-feeling dictate that the problem be fixed, how would YOU fix it and why should she accept your solution?

[EFerrari]

39. I don't need Alioto to accept me in any way.

She's a rich woman who caters to money in this city and not to the disabled.

And devoting those funds to that project would be, in my opinion, a misuse of funds needed to help real people get access.

[bean fidhleir]

42. Okay, but I repeat: even rich, grandstanding, elitist assholes deserve accommodation

under the law. Equality under the law. If we don't believe in that, where the hell are we? If we're willing to deny someone her rights because of her personality defects, what does that make us?

[EFerrari]

43. There is no question of equality when she has no reason to

use the podium. She is not president of the board.

[bean fidhleir]

45. Under the law, a person's right to find a curb cut does not depend on how many

times they cross a certain street. The curb cut is there IN CASE they ever cross that street.

[EFerrari]

48. I"m so glad I can trust our board

to really address access issues and not be stampeded by the temper tantrums of this selfish person.

I have wheelchair-bound homeless neighbors. THEY NEED HELP. Angela can go fuck herself for her over the top delusions of privilege that would benefit no one but herself.

If you believe this is an access issue and not her ego, you are mistaken.

[Irishonly]

49. It makes me angry

Sometimes I have to use my wheelchair, sometimes not. It seems to me a million dollars for a ramp no one will use is obscene. A million dollars could be used for a lot of good else where. Financial help for the poor in paying utilities, food, homeless shelters and making sure there is wheelchair access could all use additional funds. If the city is operating in the red, putting in a ramp that no one will use is just silly.

[EFerrari]

50. It's the difference between a PR opportunity

and really being serious about access.

:grr:

[XemaSab]

37. They're hardly arguing that she should not be in public office because of her disability

If there was NO handicapped accessible bathroom, that would be VASTLY different than a stupid podium.

Tell me, how is she being inconvenienced by not being able to use the podium? :shrug:

[bean fidhleir]

40. Yes, in a way they are arguing exactly that.

This shouldn't be hard to figure out. What role does the podium play? Who gets to use the podium? What is the psychological effect of podium use? What message does podium use send?

What message would it send if, let's say, non-White council members were required to sit off to the side rather than at the long table (I'm presuming the SF council chamber is like most others)? Someone who's determined not to see what's going on might say that, since they're still in the council chamber, there's no problem with them not having a physical seat at a particular table. But you and I wouldn't buy that for a nanosecond. Or would you?

[EFerrari]

41. Nope. She's had no occasion to use that podium

and in fact, if she's more worried about that podium than all the real access needs of San Franciscans, she's a self absobed idiot.

[bean fidhleir]

44. Fine, so she's a self-absorbed dildo. That doesn't strip away her rights.

Can you state with certainty that neither she nor any successor will *ever* have occasion to speak in front of the council? Of course you can't. So again, you're letting your dislike make you willing to rob her of her rights under the law. And not only her but everyone who follows her.

Is that really how you want the world to work, where if someone doesn't like you they can deprive you of your rights?

[EFerrari]

47. She has no right to use that podium.

lol

This isn't about my dislike of her -- although, I do dislike her for being an opportunistic panderer to money in this town.

This is about apportioning resources.

If she was really interested in access, she wouldn't be doing *this*.

But, don't take my word or my experience with this individual. Follow her on your own. See for yourself how long she stays on this issue.

[XemaSab]

46. And why is instituting a rule that when she's present in the chamber

speakers will refrain from using the podium not acceptable?

I understand the subtle power dynamics here, but spending a brazilian dollars of city money that could be used to:

*Hire more mental health workers
*Provide shelters for the homeless
*Feed the hungry
*Hire more cops
*Fix some potholes so that bicyclists and people on motorcycles are safer
*Make sure public toilets are clean and safe
*Give all the firefighters in the city a raise
*HIV/AIDS prevention
*Housing grants for city employees

I could probably think of 10 or 20 other things that the money could go towards, some of which could save lives and all of which would improve quality of life for a large number of people in the City...

But instead we're using the money to strike a symbolic BLOW... sort of like putting the Ten Commandments in the courthouse.

[symbolman]

58. I can't resist this one...

How about a Nice Telescoping podium, one that slides into itself as it lowers? They could even make it out of the required expensive wood and it would work fine...

Or they could buy her one of those nifty wheelchairs that climb stairs, computer controlled and freaky looking as they go up stairs with no prob.. As a matter of fact with the high tech wheelchair they wouldn't have to even TOUCH the podium, the tech chair will rise up so those bound in it can have a face to face conversation easily...

Save a lot of moola right there.. Anyone have the email of these clowns, maybe we can send them a link to the Future of wheelchairs and a dollar for a clue :)

On a brighter note, I'm still alive, and actually, after months, getting back to my old self :)

Been sick as a dog a LONG Time.. Thought I was going to Die, serious...

Sheesh, they got no High Tech in SF anymore? :)

[EFerrari]

60. We have hi tech but it's mostly being directed to those nice big

defense contracts.

Good to see you, symbolman! :hi: