August 18, 2006
Looking Under the Couch Cushions for Small Change
Anna Griffin has a piece in yesterday's in Portland section of the Oregonian (City turns to parking in drive to fix roads).
The idea is to figure out what the parking permits that a number of different categories of organizations (press, non-profits, etc.) use to skip paying at parking meters are really "worth" (in the sense of the amount of revenue that the City loses). The first staff report suggested some pretty expensive permits for non-profits.
While I'm not conceptually opposed to the idea of understanding the true costs of these things, my reaction is the same as my feeling about hitting up Flexcar for $60K or so annually: this has a certain air of desperation about it. Shouldn't we be thinking bigger picture about our transportation funding challenges?
August 18, 2006 12:48 PM
Considering the cost of a street level parking spot ranges from 6k-12k per year, 60k is absolute rape. The city should turn such a huge profit everybody in the city could have a personal helicopter!!!
But I digress, everyone SHOULD pay for their parking spot somehow and in some way. It's rather silly that it comes from the general budget for road maintenance to keep and maintain these parking places.
August 18, 2006 6:07 PM
Chris Smith Says:
Adron, $60K is for ALL of Flexcar's locations that are in meter districts.
But I also think your other number is high. Can't you get downtown surface lot parking for around $200/mo?
August 19, 2006 4:09 PM
jim karlock Says:
JK: Then there is the parking meter revenue taken for the streetcar. Looks like we should have used that for the road maintenance problem.
August 21, 2006 7:40 AM
Ross Williams Says:
Shouldn't we be thinking bigger picture about our transportation funding challenges?
Maybe, but sometimes the little stuff adds up. And the city subsidizing parking costs for the media and local businesses doesn't seem to me to make much sense. Not only can they afford to pay the full charges, but there really isn't any reason reporters, for instance, can't walk, use transit or even ride a bike for some or all of their trips.
Of course you would expect reporters to whine about losing their perks and whine about it in print while lumping themselves in with "those nice people who carry hot meals to the elderly and minister to the homeless." Poor, persecuted Anna. Those city bureaucrats just don't understand the sacrifices of being an Oregonian reporters.
Editorial to follow.