(27th in a series of posts on parking)
I’d like to scratch my head. But Gadflies have wings. No can do.
I’d like to scratch my head over the Mayor taking a pass on the suggestion that limited free parking could work fiscally.
It’s clear the Mayor was listening at the September 20 public meeting. He took notes. (Neither BPA nor Desman did – boo!)
Elements of the Mayor’s listening and note-taking became part of his decision. Fannnntastic!
But there was a suggestion that free parking (Gadfly assumes one or two hours of such) & $25 fines would generate the same revenue as the $1.50 & $15 proposed – and have a strikingly different aura.
Now what did the Mayor see that the suggestor didn’t?
Did he run the math and find it just doesn’t work?
I must admit that I’m very curious.
In any event, would somebody run the math here?
Gadfly is mathematically challenged. But he knows 9 uses for the comma, in case anybody needs help there.
IMO, it’s not a case for ‘running the math’, because we don’t know how many people would park overtime and have to pay a fine. The BPA & Desman should have reported on what other cities had tried the free parking approach and what the results were — and the Mayor should not have acted without \an in-depth analysis.
Peter Crownfield