I feel that governments should handle their revenues with as much budgetary transparency as possible. And I feel that citizens should educate themselves on the processes and standard practices of the government, particularly if they want their "personal preferences" or feelings to be taken seriously.

I have not reviewed any material regarding the decision-making process for Somerville parking violation fees (including recent changes to such fees and fines), and so I do not presume to make an uninformed judgment on whether the City is, in fact, using parking violations as a "revenue generator," except in the sense that this is a normal activity of government that does, in fact, generate revenue (one of the few).

The City's "incentive to try to meet projections" is based entirely on what you have already mentioned - "programs and salaries." Fees and fines cannot be used as a way to artificially inflate the budget - that is part of what accounting ethics and audits prevent. Somerville's spending is not based on what it generates via fees and fines - if it were, there would not be much of a city government. Contrary to some of your sensationalist commentary (oh no we better park next to fire hydrants!), it would be against standard accounting practices for the City to base the bulk of its operating budget on projected fines.

Here's the summary version: Facts about governmental accounting practices matter more than feelings in this discussion.