Mayor sets up Parking Task Force

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

Just received this notice from my Alderman.

http://www.somervillema.gov/NewsDetail.cfm?instance_id=1464

Comments

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

Note one important point about the time-frame the Mayor is hoping to adhere to, so the petition for public hearing needs to fit into that schedule as well (ie: the hearing needs to happen this month).

“I have asked the Task force to complete its work by no later than June 30th so that we can complete all changes without delay,” said Curtatone. “If the appellate Traffic Board receives any petitions, they should be able to schedule their separate hearing and review process in the same general timeframe.”

[geekpixie.livejournal.com]

I don't know why they're bothering, it sounds like they intend to move forward with everything they started out wanting to do, and just want to do it with more visibility, as if that will make us feel better about it.

You can't make that time line if you allow for due process and community input, and it's arrogant to think so.

[tober.livejournal.com]

Clearly. There's no need for a "parking task force" anyways. Decisions of the Traffic Board are already subject to review by the board of aldermen (should they wish to take up such a subject). This sends, as far as I am concerned, the message that the aldermen (and mayor) do not wish to review the decision of the Traffic Board. Moreover, the process of appealing to the Traffic Board is entirely toothless (i.e.- the Traffic Board has no incentive of which I am aware to change its mind). I expect, therefore, that we will see the implementation of the new parking regulations as currently proposed.

[geekpixie.livejournal.com]

I'm obviously still turning in my petition and sending out copies (Thursday will be the first day I've had time in the morning to go by the Parking office and known that was the place to submit the petition) but I can't help but feel the same way. Toothless is a good description. I also wish that I'd gotten more signatures, but for all the rabble rousing on the internets I was lucky to scrap together 50 signatures (the required amount) over the last week or so. I have a nice long list of signatures from the Somerville Theatre's petition that are possibly residents but their petition didn't state "I am a registered voter" so I can't count on them checking all of those and counting them, or even caring. We'll see.

[tober.livejournal.com]

I do applaud your petition effort (I would have signed the non-resident petition - I live in Cambridge - had I been in the vicinity of Davis last Wednesday although I think non-resident signatures will hold no sway with the Traffic Board anyways) but I think that actually the most effective thing that Somerville residents can do at this point is to lobby their ward alderman and/or the aldermen-at-large. If you care sufficiently then you should make it clear to him/her that he/she will absolutely not be getting your vote in the future if the proposed parking regulations come to pass as they now stand.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

Decisions of the Traffic Board are already subject to review by the board of aldermen (should they wish to take up such a subject).

Wrong.

Please be advised that new parking regulations were passed by the Traffic & Parking Commission and do not require Board of Aldermen approval. The new regulations are subject to possible review by a three-member Traffic Board. (http://www.somervillechamber.org/news_images/5_25_09/09newparkingregs.pdf)

[ron_newman]

The Aldermen could, however, pass an ordinance that revokes or modifies this authority.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

Right, but that's not just affecting this particular debate- that's something that would challenge the very authority of the TP&C on all matters.

Would the Aldermen be willing to wage a bloody war over this?

I think the Mayor realizes this is a huge storm that blew up unexpectedly- TP&C figured it could just shove this down people's throats and nobody would take notice or try to fight it. The Mayor must now try to find a politically expedient way out of this that keeps voters / business owners happy and doesn't cheese off powerful political allies.

[tober.livejournal.com]

I did not mean to imply that the board of aldermen are required to review such decisions, just that they can (and that ultimately any authority vested in the Traffic and Parking Commission was granted by the municipal government and can be revoked by that government as well)... and that moreover since the Commission / Traffic Board has no incentive to actually listen to the people, the best form of appeal is to one's alderman. I stand by that statement.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

Well, as you can see by what I quoted, the T&PC beg to differ and seem to think their decision can only be reviewed by this "Traffic Board"- not the Aldermen.

Whether or not they are correct in this assertion remains to be seen. My point I made below is that I am curious to see if the Aldermen push back on this and re-assert their authority and reign in T&PC. To do so might cause one hell of a power struggle to break out, which would be pretty damn interesting in its own right.

See, a component of this is that T&PC sprung this on people at the same time Somerville's been holding "ResiStat" meetings in every ward, to listen to people to get their input on city hall matters. This new parking regs were sprung on the public after a number of these meetings were already held, and nothing I read said that these regs were even discussed prior to this latest storm.

Which leads me to believe that this was done to cut the knees out from under the folks behind ResiStat and show them as powerless.

[bryant]

Yeah; the city's already in the crunch, is the problem.

I tend to agree that they did a bad job of talking about the pending changes, but I think it's also worthwhile to ask how residents could do a better job of keeping themselves informed. I am somewhat surprised that nobody at DARBI was tracking the budget page.

[ron_newman]

What kind of crunch? I don't know of any local parking-related issue that really requires the city to take this proposed action (or any other action, for that matter). Just put the whole thing on the shelf for a year while it is reworked with full public input.

[bryant]

Dude. The Davis Square snark community is over that way.

[sonofabish.livejournal.com]

This is an excellent idea and it is also a point I've been making. There are people who have signed leases to live in particular neighborhoods in Somerville for the explicit reason of not having to deal with parking permits and there being free and plentiful parking in the area. I know when I moved here this was the deciding factor in choosing to live where I live, as opposed to closer to Davis.

By suspending at least the permit provision, it would be a measure of fairness to those who already signed leases. Make it effective as of 9/1/10 to clear this current lease cycle and minimize the risk of some pissed-off person(s) filing suit against the city that will require the city to have to hire an attorney for the case and costing the city more money it will take in with the new permit fees.

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

I think they are bothering because Alderpeople *have* gotten feedback from constituents that more public discussion is necessary. I know I had a long conv with Ald Pero yesterday about the situation.

As you know, I support your petition efforts and think it's not impossible to get the hearing scheduled by the 30th.

[geekpixie.livejournal.com]

I know you do. And I appreciate it, I just feel as though this is a CYA move rather than anything else. I'm concerned that they'll schedule a hearing with too little turnaround for attendance and we'll get the same response that the petition did, barely enough.

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

Oh I agree it's a little too little too late, but it is still better than nothing. What if that original poster never informed this community about the new parking regs? This would have gone through without ANY discussion. Now, the business owners are being polled, an emergency meeting of same has been called, the internetz are full of discussion about this, and your petition will result in a public hearing. I totally anticipate them not giving much notice (seems to be standard operating procedure here), but at least there will be an opportunity to weigh in.

[chumbolly.livejournal.com]

Huh, I actually think that release is encouraging. They are including some key stakeholders, including the owner of the Somerville Theater, some people that get elected, and some people that know what they're talking about. In fact, I'd say this is just the sort of response I would hope your petition would create. Someone realized people were pissed, said, hang on, let's pull some people together and figure this out.

[ron_newman]

Ian Judge manages the Somerville Theatre, but he isn't the owner (the Fraiman family is)

[svilletheatre.livejournal.com]

Yes, but both Richard AND I are on this task force:)

IF this meeting/task force listens to what Mark Chase has to say, which a)addresses the concerns of residents and businesses alike, b) takes revenue into account, and c) helps both turnover & long term parking needs, then we have a chance. Mark knows his stuff. Somerville has been at the edge of other technology & new ideas before and I am hoping that rather than push the current proposal through, we can think outside of the box and create a better plan. I hope that the task force has the ability to do so and is not a waste of time. I believe we do have a chance.

At a meeting with business owners and such last night, both Alderman Gewirtz and Alderman Taylor attended, and both (an all in the meeting) agreed that at the very least, there needs to be a delay in the process so all involved can analyze it and come up with solutions to the major concerns.

[ron_newman]

Whoops, you're right of course. Don't know how I missed that.

[ron_newman]

Ian, does the comment below by gaylib reflect any actual reality? It sounds really strange to me.

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

And by *more* public discussion of course I mean *some* public discussion.

[geekpixie.livejournal.com]

Heh, yes, *any* public discussion ;)

[derekp.livejournal.com]

I sent an email to my Alderman (Bob Trane), the two Aldermen-At-Large, and the Mayor specifically about the regulation that turns "2 Hour Parking Except By Permit, 8AM-6PM" streets into 2 Hour Parking Except By Permit 8-6PM, Permit Parking 6PM-8AM" streets. I was specifically concerned with the red-tape involved in getting parking passes for small gatherings. To date, I've received the following responses:

Trane: I share some of your concerns. I have been speaking with the Mayor and we are forming a committee to review implementation of the new rules and I hope we can offer some changes. I do not want to overburden people with a bureaucratic quagmire and I am hopeful we can come up with ideas that will make entertaining at out homes less burdensome.

Sullivan: THANK YOU for taking the time to share your concern about the new parking regulations and the inconvenience it will cause. I will raise your concerns to the Administration and the Director of Traffic & Parking.

No response from the Mayor or Alderman Connolly as of yet.

[duffless2323.livejournal.com]

Trane didn't respond to me at all. Oh well, I tried.

last comment today

[winterhill.livejournal.com]

I can't be the only one thinking they should rename the Parking Solutions Task Force (PSTF) to the STFU task force, can I?

Re: last comment today

[http://users.livejournal.com/_meej_/]

I don't know; I've been pronouncing it in my head as the "Pissed Off," which I think is fairly appropriate. :-)

[koshmom.livejournal.com]

They appear to want these new regulations for commercial use. Not all of Somerville's streets are in a commercial area, Yet those non-commercial areas will become Resident Parking only.

If there's a problem of residents getting parking, why don't they make all streets that would become Resident Only, just make them "Residents or resident passes can park from 2 am thru 9 am, but others can park there during other hours." This way residents can have friends over for most of a nice evening event, and their friends won't have to take next to useless midnight buses to get to out of town where they had to park their cars. And since the public can't start parking there til after rush hour is essentially over, you won't get as many people parking in residential areas all day when commuting into their jobs.

[m00n.livejournal.com]

Presumably most car owners want to be able to park their cars on the streets near their houses when they get home from work at 6 pm...

[koshmom.livejournal.com]

If it's a non-commercial area, what's the problem? I suspect that many "troublesome" cars are those who park all day, from 7 am thru 7-8 pm. Or else those who park (almost) all week, and move it only to avoid the weekly road sweeping. Both of those type cars will be gone, freeing up spaces for the after-6pm residents. And if residents go out for the evening and return around 10 pm, others who aren't staying overnight will have begun the nightly exodus and spaces will become more numerous again.

[m00n.livejournal.com]

I think the only thing parking permits are really useful for is asking residents who want to park their cars on the street to chip in a little for the privilege. Most non-residents who would want to park in a resident zone probably fall into one of four categories:

1. People visiting residents
2. People patronizing businesses or
3. People working at businesses
4. People parking in one area so that they may commute to another area

Numbers 2 - 4 do not tend to overlap with the needs of residents with the exception of people working at, servicing, or patronizing businesses that are open well after 9-5, and most of those businesses tend to be located in business districts. Number 1 overlaps with residents, but those people are eligible for visitor permits so they'll be parking there anyway.

So I guess what I'm saying is that I tend to think requiring permits between 8 am and 6 pm mainly results in a lot of unused curb space.

[boblothrope.livejournal.com]

If residents had a problem getting parking, they could petition to have permit parking added to their block using existing mechanisms. There's no reason to impose permit restrictions citywide.

(I would certainly support allowing nonresidents to park for a few hours, or pay to park all day, in all *existing* permit zones.)

[cos]

Where I used to live in Somerville, on Beacon Street, the regulations were (and AFAIK still are) 2 hour parking (unmetered) 8am-6pm except by permit, which allows you to park for as long as you want. I think that system is great for places where parking congestion is high enough to need resident parking restrictions.

[fenicedautun.livejournal.com]

I actually was wondering whether they should just reverse this, if they need to raise more money. Right now the default is non-resident parking, that can be appealed to change to resident. Why not default to resident parking and then residents/owners on that street can appeal to have it changed back?

Not on Sundays Rebecca

[gaylib.livejournal.com]

I just talked to my Alderwoman, She and I agree on so much. BUT, She and the Somerville Theater are now pushing to pay for the delay they want by having the meters work on SUNDAY, the only free day we get. For this she wants to delay the resident parking till 2AM after all her drunk friends from Tufts and all the 2AM business buddies go home drunk, then us poor schleps that actually live here and pay taxes and park. My partner and I live here, we participate in our Church and want to be able to without paying for it, FREEdom of religion. I do not have a problem with a business like the Theater, that I cannot take my niece or nephew to for a movie because they do not let in CHILDREN, NO KIDS. If it means saving a teacher or a firemen, make the businesses and the patrons pay the market rate, but not me on Sunday to worship, and while you're at it pull the Theaters entertainment license till they service kids, if they cannot because they have a liquor license, well then pull that. I live here, pay taxes, and vote. My voice counts more than the people you represent Rebbecca, unless you're just passing threw listen up, I agree on most things not this.

Re: Not on Sundays Rebecca

[ron_newman]

I can't speak to the Sunday proposal, knowing nothing about it, but I do want to correct this:

I cannot take my niece or nephew to for a movie because they do not let in CHILDREN, NO KIDS.

The theatre's actual rule is:

Please note that children under the age of 8 are not allowed in movies beginning after 6 p.m. and that all children attending matinees must remain quiet or leave if they cannot keep quiet. Audiences do not like to pay to hear children make noise!

The liquor license does not have any effect on whether kids can or can't go to movies at the theatre. Also, the theatre generally does not show many movies that would be appropriate for a child under 8.

Re: Not on Sundays Rebecca

[svilletheatre.livejournal.com]

First of all, this is ENTIRELY UNTRUE. We at the theater are not pushing for Sunday meters (in fact, it would hurt our Sunday business.) We were merely at the meeting where the idea of Sunday meters was brought up, and NOT BY US, and NOT BY REBEKAH. It was one of several dozen random ideas put out there by various people in the room as ways to raise revenue. I don't think anyone took it seriously.

The only thing that we at the theater can say for certainty is that we do not want meters after 8pm as that would seriously hurt us.

And frankly, KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT before you come on here and speak falsely about our supposed efforts, opinions, or policy. Did you talk to me? No, you didn't, so you have no freaking clue what I am advocating for.

You know what, we are a for-profit business, but we give to this community - not because I am bribing people's opinions, but because I actually give a shit about the neighborhood. Charities or fundraisers ask for passes, we give. ArtBeat wants the theater for the annual dance show, we donate it to the city, not minding that ArtBeat kills business for the day because ArtBeat is awesome. SCAT wants to showcase student films, we donate the screening room. We contribute money to HONKfest, and this fall we are donating the stage for it because it is a great thing that helps make Davis Square the amazing place it is to live and do business.

I live here, and have lived here almost my entire life and it is the best neighborhood, and I am not ashamed to say that I make an effort to ensure the theater is a big part of why Davis Square is great. So you can take your suggestion of pulling my entertainment license and shove it.

Re: Not on Sundays Rebecca

[ron_newman]

Thanks, Ian. Real people in this community know how important the theatre is to Davis Square and to Somerville in general. Not only did the gaylib troll create this LJ account for the sole purpose of posting the above comment, he is also unable to spell 'Rebekah' and posted a similar comment here as somervillelibberal [sic]

Re: Not on Sundays Rebecca

[ward5born.livejournal.com]

Bravo Ian. I've watched you and your organization give and give and give to Somerville all these years. And I thank you for that. But remember this my friend. The Mayor of this city is all about take, take , take, take. And until you and the other small businesses in the city tell him to stick his new fees, fines, extended days and hours where the sun don't shine, he'll continue to put his hand out to all of you and continue to ask for more. And what do you get in return?

I'll let you answer that.

[tt02144.livejournal.com]

You create a Task Force when you want someone else to make the decision. Then you can say you tried to stop it, but the Task Force made their recommendation. You also don't create a Task Force without knowing what its' decision will be (if, as in this case, you've already decided what new rules you wish to implement). There are at least 5 people on the Task Force who work directly for the Mayor. You can bet that some of the others are on his side on this. I've heard several alderman already make comments privately that soon the city will be 'all permit parking'. And as far as hearings go, the summer months are the best time to hold hearings if you don't want a large turnout. This will happen, and it's all about the $$$. The city makes a huge amount of money on parking, which is why they keep hiring PCOs (Parking Control Officers) while laying off elsewhere. And as far as permit parking being for the good of the residents......I have parked on residential streets near Davis for the day, but it's OK because I have a permit. Anyone with a city permit can still clog a residential street, it only prevents 'outisders' from doing it.
Permit Parking:
~You must pay all city tickets to receive a permit.
~You pay for the permit.
~You pay for the guest cards (which by the way come up with huge and bizarre restrictions).
~You will pay excise tax to Somerville, because you must register your car in Somerville.
~If you forget to renew your permit, you will GUARANTEED have a ticket on your car written at 12:01 am on the day after the expiration.
~Your friends who come to visit will receive tickets if you forget about the lovely new tradition of guests coming in, getting the guest pass, then returning it to their car, then reversing the process when the guest leaves.
~You pay if you need to replace a guest pass (it happens, someone drives off with one by mistake, etc.).
Longer-hour meters:
~Ticketed for running out of time on the meter.
~Ticketed because you neglected to bring quarters with you for the meter, thus did not pay.
~Ticketed for feeding the meter (this is illegal and you can bet that it will soon be enforced).