Executive Summary
In Massachusetts, the Registry of Motor Vehicles (“RMV” or “Registry”) issues disability parking placards (“placards”) to persons with qualifying medical conditions. Placards allow persons with disabilities to park in designated handicapped spaces and at parking meters for free. The meter-fee exemption and the convenience of parking close to work can act as incentives to misuse placards by, for example, using a relative’s placard to park for free at a parking meter all day. This incentive is particularly strong in urban areas, where parking is both expensive and hard to find. In Boston, for example, the cost for a commuter to park in a garage can exceed $6,000 a year, and purchasing a deeded parking space can cost over $100,000.
Placard misuse has become so commonplace in urban areas across the country that a 2010 Washington Post article described placards as a “prized commodity” that some families pass down as “heirlooms:”
In a commuter-clogged city where 25 cents buys only eight minutes at a parking meter, handicapped placards are a prized commodity. Families have been known to pass them down as if they were heirlooms. Thieves covet them: Last year, a Temple Hills man ... was arrested for stealing placards from cars – ignoring global positioning systems and stereos – so he could sell them for $50 each.1
At the same time, disability advocates report that it is difficult to find accessible parking in Boston and other cities and towns throughout the state. Placard abuse is also illegal and costs cities and towns parking revenue.
Given the continuing importance of this issue, the Inspector General’s Internal Special Audit Unit (“ISAU” or the “Unit”) initiated an investigation of placard abuse in July 2014.2 The Unit investigated the use of placards to park at meters in Boston, examined the RMV’s process for reviewing and approving placards, and assessed the state’s authority to prevent and detect placard abuse. The Unit uncovered the ongoing abuse of placards in every Boston neighborhood it surveilled. The ISAU also found gaps in both the RMV’s placard process and the state’s placard laws that make it easier for individuals to obtain and use placards inappropriately. Specifically, the ISAU found that:
1. Drivers misused placards in order to park for free all day at metered spaces near their workplaces.
Surveillance of four Boston neighborhoods revealed that seventy-seven vehicles regularly displayed a placard belonging to someone other than the vehicle owner, including relatives, roommates and acquaintances. Working with the ISAU, the Massachusetts State Police cited twenty-three of these drivers for placard misuse and confiscated their placards. In each instance, the authorized placard holder was not present in the vehicle when the driver left the parking space.
- Four placards belonged to a deceased person.
- Two placards had been reported lost or stolen, and had been cancelled in the RMV’s records.
- One placard had been purchased for $300.
In addition, fifty-seven drivers covered some or all of the information on their placards (including the placard number and expiration date), or faced the front of the placard away from the windshield, thereby concealing the placard number and expiration date. None of the vehicle owners had their own placards.
Concealing placard information allows individuals to use placards belonging to someone else, as well as to use lost, stolen and expired placards. While the RMV prohibits these practices, the legislation governing placard abuse does not clearly state that these are citable offenses.
2. Some placard holders have job duties requiring physical activities that contradict the state’s mobility limitations for obtaining a placard, but the RMV has limited authority to investigate suspected placard abuse.
An individual qualifies for a disability parking placard if he cannot walk more than 200 feet without assistance, resting or an ambulatory aid. During its investigation, however, the ISAU identified individuals whose job duties require long hours of standing and walking.3 For instance:
- A chiropractor obtained multiple temporary placards and a permanent placard over the course of ten years by having his employees complete and sign several placard applications for him. A witness reported that the individual regularly walks around his apartment building without stopping to rest, without assistance and without any ambulatory aids. ISAU staff also observed this individual walking more than 200 feet without resting, assistance or ambulatory aids on multiple occasions. Further, the chiropractor regularly uses social media to post photographs of himself at a New England ski area.
- An employee of a window-washing company used a placard to park in front of the State Transportation Building (“STB”) in the Theater District each day while he and his colleagues worked at the building. ISAU staff repeatedly observed the vehicle’s driver and passengers walking into the building, without ambulatory aids or apparent difficulty, while also carrying heavy equipment.
3. While the RMV is committed to combatting placard abuse, the agency has limited authority to reject suspicious placard applications. Furthermore, the current placard laws do not contain a mechanism to protect against fraudulently obtained placards.
4. Some temporary placards are extended multiple times, sometimes years beyond the original expiration date.
In a sample of 548 temporary applications, 19% extended their temporary placards three or more times. Seven had extended their temporary placards between eight and fifteen times since 2003. In one extreme example, a temporary placard holder renewed his placard seventeen times over nine years, using relatively the same diagnosis on each placard application. The initial application was for a six-month placard. There are many medical reasons that an individual may need to extend a temporary placard. As stated above, however, the RMV has limited authority to question suspicious applications, such as seemingly excessive temporary placard renewals.
5. The RMV’s placard application is inconsistent with state law because it lists arthritis as a stand-alone basis for receiving a placard.
Arthritis does not, by itself, meet the regulatory requirements for a placard. Rather, an individual with arthritis qualifies for a placard if the arthritis prevents him from walking more than 200 feet without resting, assistance or ambulatory aids. This discrepancy between state law and the application allows an applicant to obtain a placard without a medical provider certifying that the condition severely limits his mobility, contrary to the regulation.
6. The improper use of placards in Boston may cost the city millions of dollars each year. If just 10% of drivers who regularly park at meters in Boston are misusing placards, for example, this translates into approximately $1.8 million in annual lost revenue for the city.
7. Approximately 50% of the placard applications the ISAU sampled had incorrect healthcare providers recorded in the RMV’s electronic system. This leads to inaccurate recordkeeping at the RMV, as well as the inability to effectively monitor or analyze provider data.
The RMV has taken several steps to improve its placard process since the Office of the Inspector General released its last report in 2013. Placard abuse continues, however. Combatting this problem requires a combined effort between the RMV, the Legislature, local law enforcement, the disability community, parking officials and the healthcare providers. The ISAU therefore recommends that the RMV take the following steps:
1. Work with the Legislature and other stakeholders to revise and update the state’s placard laws.
Most importantly, the RMV should consider implementing a two-tier placard system like those adopted by other states. The two-tier system would grant the meter-fee exemption to specific placard holders who are physically unable to reach a parking kiosk or insert coins into a meter. The Boston Commission for Persons with Disabilities supports this recommendation.
Alternatively, the RMV should work with state lawmakers to add a time limit to the meter-fee exemption. For example, placard holders could be required to observe the posted time limit for metered spaces. Adopting a two-tier system or adding a time limit would help curtail placard abuse because it would limit the ability to use a placard to park at a meter all day for free.
The RMV and the Legislature should also pursue additional measures to curb placard abuse. For instance:
a) Make the obstruction of a placard number or expiration date, as well as reversing a placard, a citable offense under state law.
b) Impose penalties for making a false statement when reporting a placard lost or stolen.
c) Increase the fines for misusing a placard.
d) Make it a crime to use a deceased person’s placard.
e) Expand the RMV’s ability to detect and correct placard abuse.
2. Revise the current placard application to be consistent with 540 CMR 17.00.
The RMV should remove arthritis as a stand-alone basis for receiving a placard. An individual with arthritis would still be able to get a placard as long as a medical provider certified that the individual could not walk more than 200 feet without resting, assistance or an ambulatory aid.
3. Consider adopting additional procedures for temporary placard extensions.
The Registry should strengthen its oversight of temporary placards. The agency could, for instance, contact providers who sign an individual’s temporary placard application three or more times to verify that the temporary status is appropriate.
4. Work with cities and towns to enforce the placard laws and combat abuse.
This could include providing cities and towns with information about common methods of placard abuse, the impact of such abuse, and enforcement options, including self-funding enforcement models. The RMV could also explore ways for parking clerks to issue fines for certain placard violations. Because parking clerks monitor parking meters and parked vehicles, they are in an ideal position to identify vehicles with expired placards, as well as placards that are obstructed or not forward-facing.
5. Educate the healthcare community on the specific criteria required for placards and the impacts of placard abuse.
6. Develop an electronic reporting tool for local law enforcement officials to immediately report cases of placard abuse to the RMV.
7. Update the medical provider information in the agency’s electronic records and ensure that its database lists the correct provider who signed each placard holder’s application.
8. Formalize the Placard Abuse Task Force, possibly through legislation.
Combatting placard abuse requires a combined effort among stakeholders at the state and local levels, and the RMV’s task force is the appropriate vehicle for this collaboration.
Placards are intended for persons with true disabilities and not as financial relief for commuters. By implementing the recommendations above, the RMV has the opportunity to effect significant changes that could decrease placard abuse and increase parking revenue across the Commonwealth.
Additional Resources
Contact for Abuse of Disability Parking Placards in Massachusetts: Executive Summary
Online
Phone
Address
| Date published: | February 4, 2016 |
|---|