08/11/1975 Meeting - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Councilman Haws wondered what the revenues would cover under tile two alternatives. Mr. Keller stated his previous understanding that a $3.00 late penalty would more than' . cover the deficit now experienced. And knowing the feelings of the' people rece'iving' overtime parking tickets, he sq.w no reason to double the initial bail figure to $'2.00, e either for parking on the periphery or in the core area, thereby"dis'cburagin-g people from shopping downtown. Councilman Haws asked the amount of revenues that ~could be expected from the two pro- posals. Al Williams" traffic ~ngineer. answered that keeping the initial bail figure at $1.00 and increasing the late penalty fee to $3.00 would more than. cover the present defid t, . assuming.the same rate of late:payments as experienced during the past year. He cautioned that fixed costs continue to increase each year and there was no way of knowing what the deficit would amount to this year. In further response to Mr. Haws, Al Williams said that based on the experience factor, potential revenues from $2/$4 schedule would amount to about $20,000 in addition to covering the deficit.~ He added that this money goes to the general fund. Councilman Murray felt the line of discussion although relevant was obscuring the primary intent - to discourage use of meters for long-term parking. He felt Mr. Keller's outlook might discourage delinquent payment but would not work toward parking turnover. If the situation was unchanged, he said, it amounted to public subsidy of parking on residential streets for commercial purposes. Councilman Bradley agreed. Councilman Keller thought that might be true. However, he said, the major problem appeared to be ' in the University area and if it was intended to place the "blame" on private business then perhaps the discussion was not too relevant. He said that basically parking tickets tend to make people unhappy, regardless of whether they cost $1.00 or $2.00. His intent, he said, was not to subsidize parking for the benefit of private enterprise, it was simply to cover the cost of parking. Vote was taken on the motion for second reading of the bill containing e the $2/$4 amendment. Motion defeated - Council members Murray, Beal, and Haws voting aye; Council members Keller, Bradley, Hamel, and Shirey voting no. .. . Mr. Keller moved second by Mr. Bradley that the bill containing the $1/$3 amendment for overtime parking be read the second time by council bill number only, with unanimous consent of the Council, and that enactment be considered at this time, with the understanding that the balance of the bill remain as originally proposed. Motain carried unanimously, and the bill as amended was read the second time by council bill number only. Mr. Murray moved second by Mr. Keller that the bill as amended be approved and given final passage. Rollcall vote. All council members present voting aye, the bill was declared passed and numbered 17438. D. Bids -Public Works Denartment 1. Informal Bids (opened August 6 and 7, 1975) . ---- August 6, 1975 '-.-' -" -.-- - .- Cost to Amount Name of Bidder and Project Contract Cost Abutting Prop. Cos t to City Budgeted l. Pressure grout through deck cracks e' on Ferry Street Bridge" (925) 1. Hamilton Construction...........................$ 31,000.00............... .......... .0...............,.............$ 31,000.00........ $10 ,OOO.OC COMPLETION DATE: August 24, 1975 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------~------------_.~-~ 8/11/75 - 10 .447