$13 An Hour Workers Stressed Out By Extended Parking Meter Hours

Baseball fans aren’t the only folks lining the SFMTA’s pockets with night time meter gold: low paid night-shift workers are also feeling the pinch.

Starting March 4, meters close to AT&T Park have had their hours of operation stretched from the usual 6 PM to until 10 PM from Mondays through Saturdays.

According to the SFMTA, the meters use “demand responsive pricing.” On most days, the meters will cost 25 cents per hour, but will increase up to $7 per hour on evenings there are events at the stadium.

The first event with the increased meter rates was the World Baseball Classic on March 17-19. According to the Chron’s Matier and Ross, members of a cleaning crew felt the stress of the new fees to park in the area.

53-year-old custodian Juana Lopez works from 5 PM to 1 AM at a nearby China Basin building for a rate of $13 an hour, they report. Under the previous system, Lopez and her colleagues paid to park at a meter until 6, then would remain for for free for the remainder of their shift.

“It’s very stressful,” Lopez she tells the Chron, saying that she “can’t count on being picked up on time by the two buses that she could take to get to her night job in San Francisco.”

“We don’t know what to do.”

Parking in areas of Mission Bay generally east of Third Street is under the management of the Port of San Francisco, which enforces meters from 1 AM to 11 PM. In most areas, Port meter rates drop to 50 cents an hour after 7 PM.

However, Port meters in the AT&T Park area “have been adjusted to mirror the SFMTA’s hours of operation and demand-responsive rates,” says the SFMTA.

the author

Eve Batey is the editor and publisher of the San Francisco Appeal. She used to be the San Francisco Chronicle's Deputy Managing Editor for Online, and started at the Chronicle as their blogging and interactive editor. Before that, she was a co-founding writer and the lead editor of SFist. She's been in the city since 1997, presently living in the Outer Sunset with her husband, cat, and dog. You can reach Eve at eve@sfappeal.com.

Please make sure your comment adheres to our comment policy. If it doesn't, it may be deleted. Repeat violations may cause us to revoke your commenting privileges. No one wants that!
  • But San Francisco is a “Transit First” City. Aren’t we all to use MUNI for all our transit needs? The issue should not be having to pay for parking (or more and more for parking) since that has been a City policy objective for years. The real problem is that no one can count on the transit system to get them to where they need to be reliably in a reasonable amount of time. When ALL parking is charged for all City employees, from the Mayor, the Board of Sups and on down, then maybe we will get the transit system we are promised.

  • But San Francisco is a “Transit First” City. Aren’t we all to use MUNI for all our transit needs? The issue should not be having to pay for parking (or more and more for parking) since that has been a City policy objective for years. The real problem is that no one can count on the transit system to get them to where they need to be reliably in a reasonable amount of time. When ALL parking is charged for all City employees, from the Mayor, the Board of Sups and on down, then maybe we will get the transit system we are promised.

  • jwinstonsf

    Agree with Kenn. Also, as a person who is raising a family in SF on less than $25/hr, I find it not only impossible to pay for parking but the price of car payments, insurance, gas, parking tickets, registration fees, repairs, tires, etc is prohibitive. That’s why I save more than $400/month by simply not owning a car. I fill in the blanks left by Muni by biking but as Ken implies, all of the money from demand priced parking needs to go towards better bus service.

  • jwinstonsf

    Agree with Kenn. Also, as a person who is raising a family in SF on less than $25/hr, I find it not only impossible to pay for parking but the price of car payments, insurance, gas, parking tickets, registration fees, repairs, tires, etc is prohibitive. That’s why I save more than $400/month by simply not owning a car. I fill in the blanks left by Muni by biking but as Ken implies, all of the money from demand priced parking needs to go towards better bus service.

  • BanBanner

    Get rid of SFMTA.

  • BanBanner

    Get rid of SFMTA.

  • One must assume that anyone working a shift where they make $13 an hour and get off work at 1am does not live in SF. How could they afford it? Second, relying on public transportation at 1am is frankly dangerous. Would any of you want to stand by yourself at a bus stop in China Basin at 1 in the morning?

  • One must assume that anyone working a shift where they make $13 an hour and get off work at 1am does not live in SF. How could they afford it? Second, relying on public transportation at 1am is frankly dangerous. Would any of you want to stand by yourself at a bus stop in China Basin at 1 in the morning?

  • guest

    A more interesting pricing scheme where a single hour would be the standard $2 rate whereas a 3-4 hours would mirror gameday parking lot prices. But that doesn’t really help the average worker. We need to be more creative with how we utilize existing infrastructure. Do any of these businesses have available parking?

  • guest

    A more interesting pricing scheme where a single hour would be the standard $2 rate whereas a 3-4 hours would mirror gameday parking lot prices. But that doesn’t really help the average worker. We need to be more creative with how we utilize existing infrastructure. Do any of these businesses have available parking?

  • It looks like the port people will have to clean their own place if they don’t want to allow their late night staff to drive to work any more.

  • It looks like the port people will have to clean their own place if they don’t want to allow their late night staff to drive to work any more.

  • sfparkripoff

    What are “demand responsive” rates? Oh, you mean the failed SFpark program that was designed to bilk taxpayers, expand government, and generate unlimited revenue under the guise of going green. Why did the SFMTA expand the failed pilot program without ever completing their due diligence? A final report was never completed or made available to the public. Hmmm. Where did all of the money go that was spent on the pilot program? You know the 24 million dollars the Feds gave the MTA to test how “demand responsive” pricing would lower greenhouse gas emissions, decrease traffic congestion, and improve Munis on time reliability. SFpark.info alleges that that private contractors were passing themselves off as employees of the SFMTA. All of these uninvestigated conflicts of interest.

  • sfparkripoff

    What are “demand responsive” rates? Oh, you mean the failed SFpark program that was designed to bilk taxpayers, expand government, and generate unlimited revenue under the guise of going green. Why did the SFMTA expand the failed pilot program without ever completing their due diligence? A final report was never completed or made available to the public. Hmmm. Where did all of the money go that was spent on the pilot program? You know the 24 million dollars the Feds gave the MTA to test how “demand responsive” pricing would lower greenhouse gas emissions, decrease traffic congestion, and improve Munis on time reliability. SFpark.info alleges that that private contractors were passing themselves off as employees of the SFMTA. All of these uninvestigated conflicts of interest.

  • MZ

    The Port of San Francisco should not have any control of parking meters or traffic operations. While it’s one thing for the Port to operate lots and set parking rules on actual piers and docks adjacent to the water, Port-controlled meters on City streets are nothing more than a cash grab by an already wealthy public agency that takes away funding from our public transportation network.

  • MZ

    The Port of San Francisco should not have any control of parking meters or traffic operations. While it’s one thing for the Port to operate lots and set parking rules on actual piers and docks adjacent to the water, Port-controlled meters on City streets are nothing more than a cash grab by an already wealthy public agency that takes away funding from our public transportation network.