![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
inkarn8.livejournal.com posting in ![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
davis_squareDoes anyone know why the City would ticket Somerville's own residents for expired inspection stickers? -- Two tickets 3 days apart? If I owned a driveway, they would not have done this... Can't they stick to the spirit of protecting our residential parking spots from outsiders? How about a warning instead, or a friendly reminder? And then a few days to get a sticker...
And why do they ticket cars after the street cleaner has already passed? I don't get any of those tickets for that reason, but it seems silly to not be able to park after the cleaner has clearly already passed... Is anyone else interested in getting some of these unfriendly policies changed? Also, why do we pay an extra Internet fee to pay tickets and update parking passes for a service which clearly must save the city time and money from waiting on us in person? How does the city award the contract to an Internet company which is making so much money for so little service?
Does anyone have a list of local politicians that support these policies and another list of who would rather see changes made?
Thanks so much!
And why do they ticket cars after the street cleaner has already passed? I don't get any of those tickets for that reason, but it seems silly to not be able to park after the cleaner has clearly already passed... Is anyone else interested in getting some of these unfriendly policies changed? Also, why do we pay an extra Internet fee to pay tickets and update parking passes for a service which clearly must save the city time and money from waiting on us in person? How does the city award the contract to an Internet company which is making so much money for so little service?
Does anyone have a list of local politicians that support these policies and another list of who would rather see changes made?
Thanks so much!
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
RE: *sigh*
Date: 2014-09-09 08:45 pm (UTC)Thanks for the invitation...
So you sound like you support the idea of the parking department issuing tickets ( perhaps multiple times in a short period) for expired inspection stickers? Is that it? You just really like that policy? You don't have any opinion about changing the policy to issue a warning first? Did you attend these meetings and voice your support then? Would you be against changing the policy so that they issued warnings instead?
Of all of the things to fight, and to see possible corruption and back-room dealings associated with, this is probably the LAST place I would look in this city
Where is the first place you would look?
RE: *sigh*
Date: 2014-09-09 09:02 pm (UTC)Sure. Why not. I honestly don't think about it much, because I make sure my registration and inspection is up-to-date, so I generally don't care. The sky isn't falling. You have a built-in warning of a giant month number and year sitting within eyeshot every time you drive, so I don't think the city should make a policy that requires T&P officers to give written warnings (which I don't think they do for any other parking infraction in the city) for this ONE instance because you don't like to get ticketed for it. How would they keep track of it? How would they know whether your particular car has received a written warning already or not? It's just not reasonable. What is reasonable is you just remembering to do what you're supposed to do.
Similar to your earlier suggestion to just let people park on the sweeping side of the street if the sweeper has already gone by. You're assuming every T&P officer would know when that has happened for every street in the city, or that every person arriving in that neighborhood can tell if it is now "safe" to park. You may be sitting at home and know when the sweeper came by, but that doesn't mean that it's obvious to everyone else (sometimes you can tell just by looking, sometimes you can't). So your suggestion that the parking limit until 12 noon be lifted, and that the signs say "From 8am until whenever the sweeper has come by, but good luck knowing if that has happened or not and whether you might get a ticket" is ridiculous. I'm sorry to say that so flatly, but it really is.
Where is the first place you would look?
It's not my job to investigate the city, but if you're looking for ideas there have been several discussions about civic issues in Somerville right on this forum, as well as expose articles about planning and campaign contributions. I personally see more smoke than fire, but if you want to start digging those are good places to start.
How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 12:20 am (UTC)Take this example for instance, Radley Balko has written a deeply researched, detailed article about the system of institutionalized corruption by which municipalities are essentially treating their poor -- as a resource to be harvested and consumed to line their own pockets.
The idea is simple and should be familiar to anyone who's famililar with how loansharks work: they start with a fine for something -- say, having expired tags on your car, not having proof of insurance, or (I kid you not) "wearing saggy pants." If you don't have a lawyer (and they've made sure that you won't have one unless you're rich enough to hire one), then you don't simply pay the fine; instead, you have a series of court dates. The message seems to somehow have gone out to the public that if you go to one of these dates and can't afford the fine, you'll go to jail -- so people miss the dates, and are then arrested for that, instead. Then they get fined for that, as well. As well as fines for not paying the fines, and so on, and so forth....
This article is extensive and detailed you should have a clear picture of how it works. How municipalities in St. Louis County, Mo., profit from poverty (http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/03/how-st-louis-county-missouri-profits-from-poverty) http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-watch/wp/2014/09/03/how-st-louis-county-missouri-profits-from-poverty
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 02:00 am (UTC)If you believe that a car receiving multiple tickets leads immediately to gentrification and driving out poor people and the rise in inequality and disenfranchisement of entire communities then it's clear you can't have a reasonable discussion about this issue. This isn't civil forfeiture. This isn't "stop and frisk". This is a freaking ticket for not having your freaking car inspected.
Get over it. The world does not revolve around your sense of self-righteousness over getting a ticket that was completely, 100% your fault.
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 12:04 pm (UTC)What do you think the net effects of this policy changes have been? Do you really think the streets of Somerville are much safer now that people who are going to update their inspection stickers anyway are being fined on top of that. Perhaps the thinking behind this decision was that Brookline and Boston are going to steal our revenue if we don't do this too? I am not against getting a ticket for parking, expired registration, or inspection ticket.. The parking needs to be cleared, expired registrations usually come with reminders in the mail first and inspection stickers need to be done. What I am against is several tickets for it in a short time. What I would rather see is the courtesy of a warning first. And I would like to know that policy is being set based on what is best for all the stakeholders equally.
If I were being irrational like you, I would ask you about the time that you called the ACLU (http://davis-square.livejournal.com/1970968.html?thread=22957592#t22957592) because you got overcharged by a local retailer when their metrologic barcode scanner was set to multiple reads... You weren't happy with the fact that they apologized and immediately refunded your money.... .Apparently it was not enough for you and you still needed to report the incident to every overseeing government agency available.. But I am not going to ask you about that because unlike you, I am willing the stick to topic of whether or not this a bad policy without invoke your character, motives, or the ACLU...
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 02:42 pm (UTC)RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 08:39 pm (UTC)RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 08:55 pm (UTC)RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 08:45 pm (UTC)Clearly I am not the one being irrational when you keep trying to make this about me rather than stick to the topic of whether or not this a good policy for the people of Somerville.
You want a special warning system implemented throughout the state for one specific type of enforcement mechanism because you personally feel it is wrong. And even though many people here have stated why it is good policy for the city, why we believe it isn't unfair, why it benefits society and the commonwealth as a whole, the fact is that YOU don't agree with those statements and so you continue this personal online crusade of inanity.
We get it: Concerned Troll Is Concerned.
Now either go do something about it or STFU. I'm tired of getting emails that you have replied yet again with the same arguments that make no sense and are really just about your personal reaction to getting a ticket.
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 12:09 pm (UTC)"Texas law (until March 2015 when the law will change) allows you to obtain an Administrative Dismissal of an Expired Inspection ticket if the following terms are met:
1) The Expired Inspection is remedied within 20 working days;
2) The Inspection Sticker was NOT expired for more than 60 days at the time of the ticket; and
3) You pay the $20 Administrative Dismissal Fee"
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-10 08:46 pm (UTC)Why aren't you as butthurt at the $20 "Administrative Dismissal Fee" as the $50 fine? Presumably that is per offense, so there could be multiple fees assessed. Why is this vaunted as the ideal in your mind, but the straightforward fine that is barely double that in MA isn't?
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-11 06:38 pm (UTC)"The Somerville Chamber of Commerce broke the news the next morning. Egg, meet face. Total PR nightmare. Somervillains were equally angry over the changes themselves - the potential impact on business and quality of life - and the way they were made: by an appointed five-person body in the dark of night. Not even most aldermen knew.
It was "unacceptable," said Davis Square alderman Rebekah Gewirtz. "They should've had a public community process."" http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/somerville/2010/06/by_danielle_dreilinger_globe_c_47.html
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-11 07:04 pm (UTC)The quote you post does not appear anywhere in the story you link to. It's completely out of context and could be about anything, or nothing, or be made up out of whole cloth. In fact, the article you link to refutes the very claim you seem to be making, including:
"Mayor Joe Curtatone's proposed fiscal year 2011 budget now projects a $1 million decrease in parking fines..."
"Drivers learned quickly: The number of tickets issued is down 7 percent from fiscal 2009..."
"Excise tax revenue exceeded the original $4 million projection by about $300,000. The fiscal 2011 projection is slightly higher, than that, at $4.4 million. 'We make less money on tickets and we made more money on excise taxes,' Meehan summarized."
Amazingly enough, enforcing parking (or other rules/laws/regulations) leads to greater compliance. And, often, greater revenue for the city through bringing people into compliance (in this case the excise taxes that were being dodged by people not registering their cars in Somerville, as required).
Clearly you weren't living here when the new regulations regarding city-wide parking permits and extended parking hours were discussed. It was a very public, and long, process. So, once again, you aren't making a whole lot of sense. Not to mention that this has nothing to do with my question about your apparent love for a $20 fine but an irrational hatred of a $50 fine.
RE: How municipalities profit from poverty...
Date: 2014-09-11 07:34 pm (UTC)> It's completely out of context and could be about anything, or nothing . . .
So google it, like I did. It's here:
"The parking epic Homer never wrote"
http://www.boston.com/yourtown/news/somerville/2009/10/by_danielle_dreilinger_globe_c_4.html
I'm curious how many people posting here lived here when this happened? Because there was never any doubt in anyone's mind that I knew of that it (all of it - requiring permits everywhere, extending meter hours, ticketing for expired inspections) was a revenue source pure and simple. Published articles (such as the one I linked to above) stated as much concerning the permits & meters. AND there was lots of griping that many of the decisions were made by an unelected board over which the elected representatives, let alone the residents, had no power. But that's the way it is, so we just live with it.