HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-05-20 Public Comment - R. Brey - Monday's RPPDFrom:Terry Cunningham
To:Agenda
Subject:FW: Monday"s RPPD
Date:Wednesday, August 5, 2020 9:17:26 PM
Forwarding for visibility.
Terry Cunningham - City Commissioner
City of Bozeman | 121 North Rouse Avenue | P.O. Box 1230 | Bozeman, MT 59771
P: 406.595-3295 | E: Tcunningham@bozeman.net | W: www.bozeman.net
From: Ron Brey [breyron@gmail.com]Sent: Wednesday, August 05, 2020 9:08 PMTo: Terry CunninghamSubject: Fwd: Monday's RPPD
---------- Forwarded message ---------From: Ron Brey <breyron@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, Aug 5, 2020 at 9:05 PMSubject: Monday's RPPD
To: I-Ho Pomeroy <ipomeroy@bozeman.net>, <terrycunningham@bozeman.net>, MichaelWallner <mwallner@bozeman.net>
I wanted to express my appreciation for your vote on the residential permit parking district (RPPD)
fee increase on Monday. I know that you each had somewhat different reasons for your vote and
I recognize that it was a difficult vote given the disparate information that you were presented.
The Covid meeting structure precluded a more thorough conversation but I wanted to add a
couple of points that illustrate the flaws in the staff analysis.
First, I should note that, while I now live in the University RPPD, a five dollar a year fee increase is
not my concern. I also have adequate off street parking so the on-street parking issues are not as
critical for me as they are for some of my neighbors.
Mr. Meece stated that he was merely following the Ordinance provisions in not including the fine
revenue in the fee calculation because fines were not mentioned. He made the very accurate
point that it is bad public policy to look to fine revenue to fund programs. These are both
accurate statements but in application, they ignore the fact that the matter is fully addressed when
the funding is properly managed.
The 11-15-1993 minutes concerning the establishment of the enabling ordinance state clearly that
the district is to be "revenue neutral" and that "fees for the permits and the fines for violation of this
chapter of the Bozeman Municipal Code are to be set so they generate sufficient revenues to
offset the expenditures of the program; and those fees may be adjusted on an annual basis."
There was no intent to adjust the fines for revenue purposes.
The fine revenue was set to match MSU's fine structure in the University RPPD to avoid a
violation risk preference and was set as a typical parking fine for the High School RPPD.
To establish this approach the following Code language was adopted:
"The amount of the fees shall be established by resolution at the level that covers the cost of
administration and enforcement of the residential parking permit regulations in the residential
area" The fine revenue is used to calculate fee amounts but not adjusted to generate revenue.
This Ordinance language was cited by Mr. Meece as meaning that fines were not to be
considered in establishing fee amounts which is incorrect as the minutes indicate. The fees andfines are used to determine whether sufficient revenue is generated but only the fees areadjusted if necessary. The minutes and the Ordinance say the same thing and reflect Mr.Meece's accurate statement that relying on fine revenue for program funding is bad publicpolicy. In fact, the minutes go on to say " that if the program is successful, the revenue fromfines are minimal, with the permit fees bearing the majority of the costs involved."
There are a couple more statements to question. Data taken from Parking program Mgrspreadsheets 6/2019 and 6/2020 show that when citation fines for the districts are included inthe calculations, FY 2019 shows an approximate $56,000 surplus and FY 2020 shows anapproximate $45,000 surplus for the combined RPPDs. The Mayor's closing statement onMonday night was something to the effect that we know this approach doesn't work. Here's aprogram that pays for itself when properly managed and which the residents apparently aresatisfied with. I am hard pressed to imagine something working better.
Then, Mr. Meece's statement to the Chronicle: "the district is not sustainable in the longterm". According to the data on the spreadsheets, if the district was shut down tomorrow, itwould result in a net loss to the parking program of approximately $45,000. Not only is itsustainable, but it has been subsidizing the overall parking program for some time.
Again, I am personally unaffected by the outcome of this conversation but this has been aprogram that has been operating quietly and effectively for a long time. I hate to see itdisassembled for no reason other than misapplying the funding approach clearly laid out 27years ago.
You are tired of hearing from me and I'm getting tired too. Thank you again for yourthoughtful deliberation on Monday.
Ron Brey406-589-7032