Stop spending money we don’t have….. Enforce the laws we already have… what is wrong with current council… this is not rocket science… I can’t wait until this credit loving group is gone….AGAIN STOP SPENDING MONEY WE DON’T HAVE!!!!!!

Hopefully common sense will prevail and the majority of council votes against this backwards plan and waste of money.

The system is predicted to pay for itself in 5 years. Even if it takes 10, it’s not bad.

And how exactly is your fancy license plate reading technology going to work when everyone’s plates are covered from driving in the snow for 7-8 months of the year, and mud and dirt from melting snow?

“The letter from the DBIA’s President, Rod Holmes, likens returning pay parking to the downtown to a store owner increasing prices to offset shoplifting.”

Yet, that’s what businesses do. Their prices have several costs built in, including losses incurred by shoplifting. Bad example.

Bet you have a bunch of bridges and Florida swampland in your investment portfolio JB if you are eating up what they are dishing out.

One just has to look at the latest plan,or the one before that or the one before that, for how the downtown will look in 5 years to gauge the accuracy of their predictions.

If as previously reported here the way they are planning to fund the parking system is not exactly legal where would a person go to have it investigated further? RCMP? Provincial AG’s office or is there some other office that oversees municipal government?

It would be hilarious to see members of council who vote for this in the grey bar hotel for breach of public trust.

The money was earmarked for debt reduction and should be used for that and not as a way to avoid a referendum or AAP.

lonesome: “One just has to look at the latest plan,or the one before that or the one before that, for how the downtown will look in 5 years to gauge the accuracy of their predictions. “

So, your crystal ball is better than anyone elses? Direct your hate at me if it makes you feel better, but pay parking is coming back. No amount of anonymously posted comments are going to change that.

No crystal ball required, a drive through the CBD and a look at the sagging shelf at city hall holding all the failed plans is all that is required.

Pointing out someone’s gullibility can hardly be considered hate (unless they have translucent skin:)

This will just be another nail in the coffin of Green et al’s re-election chances. By any measure the worst one in my time here.

This mayor and council would not raise business license fees to fully cover the city’s costs because it would create financial hardship as some businesses are barely making it downtown…..yet suggest that these same businesses validate their customer’s parking. Hello?

Simply does not add up

Maybe that is why taxes and utilities keep going up – dem budgets are full of big ol’ and ‘rithmetic.

JB

Yet, that’s what businesses do. Their prices have several costs built in, including losses incurred by shoplifting. Bad example.

———————————————
Actually Johnny it is a great example … old school businesses that are used to constant growth and lineups of customers use your model …. businesses focusing on value for dollar (Costco) or the lowest price (Walmart) go to great lengths to reduce shoplifting … so Mr Holmes (DBIA) is right on the mark looking for increased enforcement of the bylaws (but only if you are looking for value and lower consumer cost)

politicians are not into enforcement because a “voter” might remember a parking ticket expense next election .. also it is easier politically to change the rules than enforce them … enforcing them requires a bit of fortitude and accountability … two characteristics missing in the “leaders” at City Hall … perhaps we need some training from the city officials of Singapore … a culture that get people to stop spitting chewing gum on the street must have something going right ;-)

There’s no point bringing pay parking if you are not going to enforce it. It has to start with enforcement.

If you are going to bring in enforcement, then why not do it first. You might find that any issues you thought you had with downtown parking would disappear as soon as you starting enforcing things. Hence no need to pay $1.24 million for meters.

lonesome: “Pointing out someone’s gullibility can hardly be considered hate (unless they have translucent skin:)”

Pfft. I realize nobody’s perfect and it’s sometimes hard to have a discussion without injecting pithy comments about bridges and Florida swamps, but they don’t add much.

Can you imagine the problems with towing vehicles? Think of some F350 bush truck that get’s towed while the guy is in the bank and his next stop was the bush to deliver fuel to a processor, and his vehicle is gone because he didn’t pay his 3 traffic tickets. This guy is going to go ballistic, and he’s going to direct his wrath at some poor clerk at City Hall whose going to phone the cops who are likely going to end up tasering him and we’ll have a whole new discussion on just that.

I don’t want pay parking back either, but I like the scanning the license plates and ticket them that way, but towing – hell, you can’t even drive 5 k over speed limit in this town without one of these guys trying to hump the back end of your vehicle because he’s got such a big chrome bumper. If only we could tie city parking tickets into insurance renewals, but I don’t think that’s legally possible.

If you’re going to go the tow route, you’re going to have to contract the whole mess out to someone like Impark who hire guys just as big and nasty and can take being swore at all the day long.

It’s all about the money and downtown has had a huge hit on it’s reputation and why not it’s election time might as well throw this out if they a green light then it could very well be a green for Green for the next four years. However my sense this women has made a few people pretty mad and I just can’t see both this women or her policies get the mayor’s chair again. However it’s all about money no matter what right, right or wrong. If it’s wrong then so what, somebody else will clean up the mess right? Right!

lonesome sparrow: “The money was earmarked for debt reduction and should be used for that and not as a way to avoid a referendum or AAP”

Bingo.

And if that in itself is not a big red flag, let me get this straight. A major problem with parking revenue has been people parking, not paying and never paying, followed by no reinforcement for not paying.

So after the new meters are in…I can park without paying and ignore the new meters, much like I did the old ones, never pay, followed by no reinforcement for not paying.

And of course the REAL problem, according to herr Stolz, is workers not paying for long term parking and taking up parking space by moving every two hours…OK, but rather than seek out a solution that involves the actual offenders (this isn’t downtown Toronto for crumb sake) in addition to working with the association that represents downtown merchants and the supposed victims…we just throw a million plus at it (immorally if not illegally – all to circumvent the great unwashed from foiling his plan thru proper due process) and hope it all sorts itself out?

What am I missing?

ski: “Can you imagine the problems with towing vehicles? Think of some F350 bush truck that get’s towed while the guy is in the bank and his next stop was the bush to deliver fuel to a processor, and his vehicle is gone because he didn’t pay his 3 traffic tickets. This guy is going to go ballistic”

My heart bleeds. These are the types of people who believe the rules don’t apply to them. Too bad, I say.

“If you’re going to go the tow route, you’re going to have to contract the whole mess out to someone like Impark who hire guys just as big and nasty and can take being swore at all the day long.”

Agreed.

I read that they voted it down and the mayor was the only one in favour. What a loser chick.

I’m still boggled by them voting themselves a 31% raise and management getting an 8% raise. They didn’t have to go through negotiations, didn’t have to ask the public, they just voted themselves a raise. Maybe that’s why the 2.5% tax increase is needed. Sadly parking is just one of the issues.
In the core review one of her ideas was to have the garbage collection every two weeks OR to only pick up garbage from one side of the street that way the trucks weren’t turning around so much. Does this make sense to anyone?
Its in the core review, check it out.

Someone, somewhere, stated that pay parking was coming back, and that no amount of anonymously posted comments would change that.

Seems the opposite is true. Pay parking has just received a swift kick in the ass. Exactly what it deserved. Once those who supported this misadventure realized that they were going to lose the vote, they quickly voted to support not awarding the contract. Rather than stand on principle they chose to take the political route, and pretend that they were not instigators of the original idea.