• MAYOR MICHAEL B. Coleman acted wisely when he decided to rescind a recently imposed increase in parking-meter rates.
Downtown and Short North business owners complained that they were not adequately consulted before city officials imposed the rate increase Nov. 30.
They feared that the new rates would hurt their businesses during the vital Christmas season, on top of the downturns they’ve suffered as a result of the recession.
Coleman remains committed to raising more revenue from parking to help finance a new hotel near the Greater Columbus Convention Center and replace aging parking meters. But he recognizes that it is better to work with business owners to achieve this, rather than alienating them. An advisory council will take up to six months to come up with a plan.

This petition was actually started on Sunday in response to Mayor Coleman’s lack of immediate action on this issue. ;)

Come now. You’re not accomplishing anything like that.

http://bit.ly/7q8s0B

City Research on meter replacement and fee increases:
Duh, those meters look old. We should totally replace them.
Dude, while we’re at it, we should totally jack the rates up.
We are sooo stoned.

Mike- Can you share the research that resulted in this meter increase? It might help us better accept the hardship you have placed on our small business community.

Also, the “citywide meter rate increase” is misleading. Rates were drastically raised downtown in 2005.

MEMORANDUM
 
TO: Mark Kelsey, Director, Department of Public Service
 
COPY: Boyce Safford III, Director, Department of Development
             Members of City Council
 
FROM: Michael B. Coleman, Mayor
 
DATE: December 11, 2009
 
RE: Parking Meter Policy
 
To begin with, I wish to thank you for your hard work and leadership on the issue of parking meters and express my confidence in your work. 
 
When the administration took over the Parking Violations Bureau two years ago, it was clear that parking meter policy had been created in a piecemeal way.  Recent public discussion provided many creative ideas about improvements to our parking meter policy.
 
I am charging you to pull together stakeholders, research their ideas and, where possible, integrate them into a simpler, comprehensive parking meter policy that benefits businesses, our entertainment districts and Downtown.
 
The parking meter increase that took effect November 30 was the result of research by your department after almost 12 years without replacing old meters or instituting a citywide meter fee increase.  This increase will allow the City to install new solar-powered digital meters, which offer the option of debit and credit card use.  It also allows the City to create a funding mechanism for a 500-room Downtown convention hotel, which will add 500 jobs while generating at least $2.3 million in annual sales, lodging and income taxes for the local economy as well as thousands of new customers for Downtown restaurants.  The new meters and the convention hotel have long been advocated by Downtown stakeholders, and we have the opportunity to do both while benefiting businesses and core city districts.
 
That said, this meter increase took effect without a process of full public input.  Although your department did more to inform the public than what was legally required, the City did not involve the public as much as it should have.  I appreciate that you have repeatedly acknowledged and apologized for this.  As Mayor, I too take responsibility for this oversight and offer my sincere apology.
 
Though we were tardy in soliciting it, the public input that we have received in recent weeks has already been valuable and has produced some very constructive and creative ideas about parking meter policy.  This is why I have asked you to invite those who have shared their concerns to serve on a working group to study our overall parking meter policy.  This Parking Meter Advisory Team will build upon the valuable research done in recent years regarding valet parking and Downtown parking meters. 
 
I am charging the department and this advisory group with the following:
 
·         Meter locations.  Determine whether the six meter pricing zones set up over the years should remain as they are or whether they are outdated in their current form.  Determine whether it is appropriate, as some stakeholders have suggested, to expand our coverage with additional meters, and we will determine priority locations for the new digital meters.
·         Meter operations.  Some have suggested alterations in the hours our meters are active and in the time limits of meters at various locations. These are constructive suggestions worthy of review.
·         Meter pricing. My goal is to use our meters to help, not hurt our businesses.  If there is data that the prices set for existing meters are harmful to our efforts to create and sustain economic vibrancy in and around or Downtown, we should reexamine them.
·         Meter enforcement.  I strongly believe we can improve in the area of customer service.  While it is necessary to enforce our meter policy, our parking violations personnel need to be as customer friendly as possible while performing their duties of monitoring and ticketing. 
 
Bottom line, we should be open and listen to concerns and be willing to change if, in fact, there is a better way. 
 
As we come together to address these issues, I ask that we do it in a constructive way.  At times in recent weeks, I have seen this debate digress into personal attacks that make the task before us a more difficult and contentious one and, frankly, counterproductive.  Now is the time for all of us to put animosity aside to move forward on these important issues.