PARKING BOARD
MINUTES
MAY 5, 2008
1. CALL TO ORDER 4:30 p.m. by Mr. Spatafore
2. ROLL CALL Mr. Spatafore, Mr. Walsh, Mr. Doggett and Ms. Hensley, and Parking Director James Hacker. Mr. Caggiano arrived later in the meeting.
3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Mr. Doggett made a motion to approve the minutes of April 7, 2008. Mr. Walsh seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
4. REPORT OF BOARD MEMBERS
There were no reports from Board members.
5. INFORMATION & CORRESPONDENCE
Mr. Hacker confirmed that he sent a letter to the Mayor recommending that up to 26 spaces be reserved at the South Harbor garage for anyone interested in leasing a guaranteed space.
Mr. Hacker provided the revenue figures for the parking garages, parking lots, meters and office through March, 2008.
6. NEW BUSINESS/VISITORS
Tom Daniel, Economic Development Manager in the Department of Planning & Community Development, was present to request comment on the signage that the City is hoping to install in the downtown. Mr. Daniel provided a packet of information that illustrated the comprehensive signage program and included a map with locations of the signs. He noted that, in 2003, the Parking Board approved the “welcome” and “vehicular direction” signs. Currently, new kiosk maps are going out to bid. He stated that the next phase is parking directional signage and provided samples of signs to be installed on new and existing posts. There will be 25 reflective signs including 12 replacement signs. Of the 13 new signs, 5 will be directing to public parking and 8
will identify specific parking lots. Mr. Daniel stated that the City can save money if the kiosk and directional signs are bid at the same time.
Mr. Spatafore asked if the signs are black.
Mr. Daniel stated that they are dark gray, similar to what is existing with standard blue.
Councillor Michael Sosnowski noted that the Chamber of Commerce Director is meeting with the Bridge Street Neck Historic Business District, who are concerned about loss of business as a result of the new bypass road. He encouraged that signage for this area be on the City’s radar screen.
Mr. Daniel stated that the first phase of the project was to get people into Salem toward the downtown and that the second phase is to get people around the core. He stated that the third phase will focus on areas outside the downtown.
Dawne Ramsdell, a meter attendant of the Parking Department, stated that a lot of people have to do one way circles around the Church Street lot due to the one-way streets and asked if the signage will help.
Mr. Caggiano entered at this time.
Mr. Daniel stated that signage won’t change the traffic pattern, but will help people find the lot better. He stated that the goal is to make parking easier to find.
Mr. Spatafore recommended that the Board review the documents submitted and comment at the next meeting.
Mr. Hacker asked if the June meeting would be okay to get approval.
Mr. Daniel stated that it would be cutting it close and that the city is hoping to have everything in place by July. He stated that he was willing to attend a special meeting in two weeks.
Mr. Caggiano made a motion to continue the discussion to a special meeting to be held on May 19, 2008 at 4:30 p.m. Mr. Doggett seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried.
City Councillor Robert McCarthy asked if the signage will differentiate between long and short term parking.
Mr. Daniel replied in the affirmative and noted that it is outlined in the packet provided.
7. UNFINISHED BUSINESS – RESIDENT STICKER PARKING
Mr. Spatafore read a letter dated 4/24/08 from the City Council Committee on Ordinances, Licenses and Legal Affairs concerning the potential relocation of the Resident Sticker Parking Program from the City Clerk’s Office to the Parking Department.
Mr. Hacker stated that the Committee is looking into the feasibility of transferring the program. He noted that moving won’t change the current program but, with the support of the City Council, the Department would be able to manage it. He stated that he felt the Ordinance needs to be reworked. He stated that the City Clerk and Assistant City Clerk are present to discuss the pitfalls.
Mr. Hacker distributed an outline of the staff and equipment needs that will be required to run the program within the Parking Department. He also provided a list of suggested Ordinance changes and list of issues.
Mr. Hacker suggested that the revised Ordinance start at the same time as the relocation and that it be no sooner than December 1, 2008. He stated that they will need a budget increase to cover the expenses. He stated that the City Council is asking for input from the Parking Board and others and that the City Solicitor will draft the new Ordinance.
City Clerk Cheryl LaPointe provided a copy of the application package they use and a list of special situations, as well as a chronology of the program. She noted that the program came into the City Clerk’s Office in 1993.
Mr. Hacker stated that it makes sense to relocate the program to the Parking Department. He noted that the biggest issue that arises is when staff have to say “no” to a resident.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that this issue was discussed a year ago with no conclusion as to whether to locate the program within the Parking Department or Police Department. He stated that the small part of the problem is the location. The large part of the problem are the loopholes in the program. The Council is asking the Parking Board to reach consensus and assign a representative to a working group made up of representatives including the Police and City Clerk Departments.
Mr. Doggett stated that people he has spoken to have a concern of being required to pay to get stickers to park in their own neighborhood. He stated that stickers don’t guarantee a parking spot and that it forces residents to do policing and having to call the Police, who are not always responsive. He suggested that there be a computer system that spits out stickers automatically to residents.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that the program, in theory, is to take away someone else’s right to park in front of a resident’s house. The fee is to exclude others. Councillor Sosnowski also brought up the problem of the existing zones, noting that Hubon Street, at the end of Bridge Street, is in the same zone as Federal Street. He stated that he felt that the zones should be abolished. He stated that another problem is rooming houses, where students are assigned too many stickers.
Mr. Doggett questioned why Visitor Passes are issued for more than the time needed, suggested that they be issued for a specific time (i.e. month of July). He suggested charging a daily fee. Mr. Doggett agreed that if the program were moved to the Parking Department, move can be done than at City Hall.
Ilene Simons, Assistant City Clerk, stated that residents pay extra to park at Forest River or Winter Island. She noted that it costs the city for an employee to issue a pass in time and materials. She noted that she lives in Salem, but she cannot park on certain streets, because it benefits the sticker holder.
Mr. Hacker stated that there are currently approximately 8,000 stickers out and that he did not know how many were being used, or abused. He suggested that stickers expire in 2 years, resulting in better turn-over and less fraudulent use. He stated that for people who feel they are entitled to parking because they pay excise tax, this may help them have access to more spaces.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that the City Council did not just willy-nilly add streets to the zones. Typically, a request comes from a resident and then they are required to get 100% petition form the street’s residents. The petitioners then meet with the Police to go over the pros and cons of having Resident Sticker Parking.
Mr. Walsh questioned if tenants can be a problem, if they have just moved into the city.
Ms. LaPointe stated that by law, they have 30 days to change their registration. During that time, they can notify the Police so they don’t get tagged. She noted that the Ordinance could be changed from colored stickers, to street specific.
Ms. Simons noted that Visitor Passes are never returned when someone moves out. She noted that the largest turn-over is in September when new students arrive.
Mr. Caggiano stated that initially there may be complaints, but he felt there should be a fee to cover the costs of technology and personnel. He stated that he believed the Board is in agreement that now is the time to update the Ordinance, if the program is moving to the Parking Department.
Mr. Hacker asked what assurance there is that funds to administer the program will be forthcoming.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that if there are 8,000 passes and the city collects $20 in fees each, there is $160,000 that could be put in the FY09 budget, noting that the program would fund itself. He stated that he would like to see the program on a GIS database.
Mr. Hacker stated that he cannot purchase equipment for 11/1/08 if he does not have the funds.
Mr. Caggiano asked the definition of a resident.
Ms. Simons stated that the person must be domiciled in Salem and that is why they request their registration.
Mr. Walsh asked what happens for students.
Ms. Simons stated that they require a Massachusetts registration, full time registration at school and a lease or letter from the landlord. Students only get 1 year stickers and do not get visitor passes. Out of state registrations are not accepted.
Mr. Walsh asked if there are five students rooming in a house to save money, would they all get a sticker.
Ms. Simons replied in the affirmative and noted that if a resident has 10 cars, they would get 10 stickers.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that a GIS system would be able to catch if there are 5 students in an R2 district.
Thomas St. Pierre, Building Inspector, stated that some city departments have GeoTMS and the administration is looking to expand it further. It is a system that all departments can look in to see if there is a violation against a property, how many legal units there are, etc. If updated, the Parking Department could have access.
Ms. Simons stated that there needs to be a way to differentiate between residential and commercial addresses. She noted that there are some commercial buildings that have been converted to condominiums and that they received approvals contingent that they cannot get resident stickers.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that the police do not arbitrarily tag single cars for resident sticker violations. When they get a call, they will check the entire street and tag all cars.
Ms. Ramsdell stated that she does not tag cars waiting to pick up or drop off kids to school, noting that she must use common sense and common courtesy.
Mr. Hacker asked what the City Councillors felt was the definition of a resident.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that it should be by vehicle registration, with students being the exception. He stated that students need to park, too, and should continue to provide proof of school registration and proof of apartment rental.
Ms. Simons stated that resident stickers will not help students find parking near the college.
Ms. Hensley stated that a lot of the program is enforcement and question if it should be located to the Police Department.
Councillor McCarthy stated that he lives in the Willows and none of his neighbors uses parking stickers, but that they rely on the signs to deter non-residents. He noted that there is a couple who recently purchased a house in the Willows and that there son lives there. The couple live their on weekends, but live in Arlington during the week. They do not want to change their registration, as they live in both cities. They were denied a sticker. He stated that he feels there should be a place to get a appeal hearing.
Mr. Caggiano stated that the current strict definition of a resident is:
1. The person has to own a vehicle;
2. The person has to reside in Salem; and
3. The vehicle must be registered and garaged in Salem.
Councillor McCarthy stated that it is difficult to define residency and that there are different variations.
Mr. Caggiano stated that he liked the idea of having appeal hearings.
Ms. Simons stated that there is also the situation where a landlord wants to come to the property to mow the lawn, etc. but does not reside in the city. She noted that there is more flexibility with temporary visitor passes and that in the Arlington couple situation, they could get visitor passes instead of resident stickers.
Ms. LaPointe stated that the son is entitled to two visitor passes, which the parents can use until they become permanent residents.
Councillor McCarthy suggested that the stickers be placed on the car by a city employee, similar to an inspection sticker.
Mr. Caggiano that it was also a good idea.
Mr. Hacker stated that it could be done, but would be difficult if all 8,000 come in a once.
Councillor McCarthy suggested putting the street name on the sticker. The police would not have to enforce if the person is parked on the street or in close proximity to the street, but would get tagged if they were in the other end of the zone.
Mr. Hacker stated that more zones could be added.
Councillor Sosnowski stated that he is not an advocate of color zones. He stated that if there is an address on the sticker, it is up to the officer’s discretion. He stated that visitor passes should be assigned to an address. He stated that resident stickers should have the vehicle and street information.
Ms. Simons stated that the sun fades the writing on the stickers and the color of the stickers.
Mr. Walsh stated that the sticker could state, for example, “red zone”.
Ms. Simons stated that there is no control if a person who is registered in New Hampshire to save money and then changes their registration to get a sticker and then changes their registration back to NH. She thought it was a good idea to have the vehicle number and street on the sticker.
Mr. Doggett stated that labels are available that, if you try to remove, become unreadable. He stated that technology is available to print off identifiable information, such as bar codes. He noted that resident stickers would be assigned to vehicles, while visitor passes would be assigned to addresses. He stated that the stickers should be non-removable.
Ms. Simons stated that the resident sticker permit number is located on the visitor pass.
Ms. LaPointe stated that the program can be done better and that the Ordinance definitely needs to be changed. She noted that the program will never be perfect. She stated that there is an advantage to getting new technology. She stated that clerks administering the program get a $3000 stipend per year and that funding would be moved over to the Parking Department. She agreed that the fee should be increased and that the rules should be applied consistently.
Ms. Simons agreed that the Ordinance needs some teeth.
Ms. Hensley suggested going through each item and making recommendations.
Mr. Spatafore stated that the biggest problem is parking 40 cars in 30 spaces.
Mr. St. Pierre suggested that the Parking Board be the hearing board for special cases. He did not feel the current method of running exceptions by the Ward Councillor was appropriate.
Mr. Walsh was in agreement.
Mr. St. Pierre stated that if a denial goes to court, the city will have more weight if it went through a hearing.
Mr. Caggiano asked if resident violations can be taken to William Hurley.
Ms. Simons replied in the affirmative.
Councillor McCarthy stated that a hearing would give the Councillor a way to weigh in.
Mr. Hacker stated that he will look at other resident sticker programs in other communities.
8. DATE OF NEXT MEETING
The next meeting is scheduled for May 19, 2008 and the June 9, 2008.
9. ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business, Mr. Caggiano made a motion to adjourn. Ms. Hensley seconded the motion, all were in favor and the motion so carried. The meeting adjourned at 6:22.
Respectfully submitted,
Jane A. Guy
Secretary
| 
