“Now that it sounds like we are going to be tabling the fine increases. Are you still going to direct the Parking Authority in terms of the meter increases as of January 1.”
“The answer is yes.”
So Gadfly had a feeling of substantial satisfaction about the handling of the gnarled parking issue at last week’s City Council meeting.
The Mayor outlined what is, in effect, a business plan on the Polk St. Garage, a good in its own right, but the main specific request of City Council in what President Waldron called the “infamous” set of questions posed to the BPA.
The one puzzling piece of last Wednesday’s action, however, was leaving in place the January 1 inception of the meter rate increases.
Everybody knows the rates and the fines need to work in tandem. There was plenty of discussion at the meeting of what will happen negatively if they are not in tandem.
Mainly complaints to City Council!
Councilfolk Colon, Van Wirt, and Waldron each brought it up. January 1 is an arbitrary date. The rates don’t have to go up then. We should work together on timing, said Van Wirt.
But the Mayor said yes.
I’m surprised nobody pushed him. I don’t understand why nobody pushed him.
What would a few months matter?
Why consciously court the kind of absurdity that Councilman Callahan repeatedly depicted, no matter how short the time?
Doesn’t make any sense to Gadfly.
The nasty interpretation: Public and business blowback will be directed at Council, who has responsibility for the fines, and such blowback is a backatcha by the Mayor and BPA for Council’s actions.
The benign interpretation: BPA had planned a soft opening of the new system, which wouldn’t really, really go into effect till June 1, so maybe the perturbation of the system is not seen as severe as has been forecast.
Gadfly just doesn’t understand why – during the Era of Good Feeling at the meeting – this last detail was not nailed down.
Gadfly also hopes that the examination of Variable Rate Parking doesn’t disappear and hopes that a detailed plan for studying it will emerge at the BPA meetings with Council early and mid-2019.
2 thoughts on “Never totally satisfied (72)”
It makes sense to consider the meter rates & fines in tandem, I’m not sure it is that critical — if the meter rate is going to be $1.50/hr, a person would have to leave their car there for 7 hours without getting a ticket before the ticket would be cheaper than the meter fees. I think BPA checks meters far more often than that, especially in the areas where high turnover is important.
For that matter, since BPA agents are in the busy areas several times a day, there’s a simple solution: just ticket the vehicle every 2 hours.