[OldNorth] Re: Last Pitch for Parking, ON

[Valerie Vann]

John Lofland wrote:
> 
> The letter I got from Public Works (PW) was addressed to "resident" and only
> one came to my address. The logic of that act is that each address has a
> resident and only one vote is given each residence.
> 
> So: a residence gets a vote and only one vote. If no one lives there and/or
> it is not a residence, there is no vote.
>
> It is in our interest to work up an exact count of the number of NOW
> occupied residences in the Old North and to get vacant residences, churches,
> biz buildings, and such deleted from the standard against which our votes
> are measured.
> 
> I therefore plead with our band of walkers and others to check the numbers I
> claim below AND to identify vacancies. (There are at least three on E
> Street, as just mentioned.)

First, I think it's going to be a hard sell to the City to confine voting
to current, live "residents"; the businesses are probably going
to want a vote, both as property owners and parkers. Why shouldn't
they have a vote, and a parking place in front of their property?

Same goes for rentals and vacant properties:
People are actively moving in and out of rentals at this time of
year; they are going to be people who will be gone tomorrow and
could care less, and people coming in next week who might care
a lot but weren't "resident" and didn't get any input. 
The property the owners will expect to vote on behalf of their 
tenants. And I think the City will 
support them in that. That's the way the alley paving issue was
handled if I recall correctly.

2nd, I don't understand why the survey was mailed to the area north
of 7th Street, or whether it went to street addresses or
property owners. The north area people have had no notice or
chance for input or discussion, or have they?? Or was the "mailing
area" map just recycled from last time?

I found the mailing confusing (others have raised some issues here);
and negative sounding (like the 5th St. traffic mailing). It didn't
indicate whether there was possibility of changing the way it
is implemented, or a "done deal" and we'd just wake up to find
their version painted in some day (like the screwed up curb
painting). People tend to vote "no" on confusing issues.

And the timing stinks; I think the City is pulling its same old stunt,
just like the 5th Street study, and needs to be called on these
tactics. There should have been prior notice to the Assoc. on 
these issues, with time enough to review the mailings, get out
our own materials, have at least one neighborhood meeting before the
mailing, with time to properly alert the neighborhood to the
mailed survey and educate them on the proposal.

It feels like the neighborhood is being placated or patronized
on these issues, and that the City staff has already decided
against the proposals and is just going through the motions with
the object of getting the issue killed under color of
"democratic process." 

This doesn't bode well for the many other issues we are supposed to
be "working with" the City on, and I think maybe it's time we took
these kind of tactics up with the City Manager, and if necessary
the Council.

Valerie Vann
valerie at vanngroup.com