Mayor Walsh announced today that the cost of parking at a meter in the Back Bay and the South Boston Waterfront will jump Jan. 3 in a program to see if raising prices can reduce congestion along local curbs.
In the Back Bay, the city will simply increase the cost of parking at a meter from the current $1.25 an hour to $3.75 an hour and see if that discourages people who might otherwise just try to park in the same space all day, in the year-long pilot.
But in the Seaport area, the city will use a dynamic pricing model - and sensors at individual meters - in which spaces in demand will see their prices gradually rise over several months, while spaces that nobody wants will see their hourly charges go down.
On January 3, 2017 all meters in the Seaport pilot area will be priced at $1.50 an hour and adjust by 50 cents every two months. Approximately 591 metered spots will be adjusted over 40 blocks. High demand blocks will increase by 50 cents, while lower occupied blocks decrease by 50 cents. The minimum price will be $1 per hour, and the maximum price will be $4 per hour. Price will vary by four time bands (weekdays 8 a.m. - 12 p.m.; 12 p.m. - 5 p.m.; 5 p.m. - 8 p.m. and all day Saturday). Prices will be posted on meters and available online.
City officials are hoping that by freeing up spaces, they'll reduce auto emissions - since people will spend less time driving around looking for a space - as well as reducing the crazy that comes in a densely packed city like Boston.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
PERFECT
By SFPD12
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:36pm
raising taxes without saying your raising taxes.
PERFECT
By BostonDog
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:45pm
Charging market rates for something in which there is limited supply and high demand.
Surreal Perfect would be
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:48pm
Surreal Perfect would be auctioning off resident parking permits, instead of giving them away, using the funds to offset neighborhood real estate taxes.
Why are they free, actually?
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 3:51pm
Why are they free, actually? Somerville and Cambridge both charge a nominal fee and it works fine. Money left on the table, imo
For wealthy people
By Snuggles
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:28pm
When fees to use public resources go up, there is a risk that the public resources are being given more to people who can afford it.
$20 to park is nothing to some people, but prohibitive to others.
Considering OPEC is planning
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 7:51am
Considering OPEC is planning on having gas prices start to rise really soon, if 20$ yearly is going to break somebody's ability to maintain their car ownership, they might want to look at alternatives.
Ummm... This argument bothers
By RhoninFire
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 10:56am
Ummm... This argument bothers me enough that I have to chime in and point out that I'm pretty sure the commentator you are you rebutting does not mean paying $20 a year extra. But $20 everytime. A lot garages charges $20 or more a day.
Now how many times is debatable, but that doesn't undermine the point where charging more filter out people, it also tends to filter out in favor of the richest.
The original comment
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 11:30am
The original comment discussed resident parking permits and how they are free in Boston. Next comment stated that Somerville and Cambridge both charge a fee for resident permits. Next comment clained 20$ was a bank breaking amount. Resident parking permits in Camberville are charged on a yearly basis, ergo, 20$ a year.
Add up the property that is
By Kinopio
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:44pm
Add up the property that is given away for free to spoiled car drivers and the value is in the billions of dollars. A spot on Beacon Hill should be getting the city thousands per year, not a big fat $0.
Ya let screw over locals
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:50pm
While Universities pay nothing.
Eh
By anon²
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 8:19pm
Student flight due to lack of housing regardless, the universities are economic engines that are drawing companies back to the city.
Bonehead Walsh gave away a farm to GE, but realistically they're moving here for the workforce and access to the innovation district.
Likewise the UMass system pumps in 5 billion in additional State GDP over 10 years.
Oh didn't you know? All
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 8:35pm
Oh didn't you know? All locals are spoiled rotten pearl clutchets with trust funds, inheritances, no college debt to pay off, and we don't have to work for a living!
Give it a rest already
By Anony- Mouse
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 7:24pm
The car-hate is getting tiresome.
Tire some
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 7:53am
Naw. Reasonable regulation of a dangerous and damaging mode of transport is some thing that needs to ramp up.
Greed
By Nikki
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:20pm
Is a four letter word
tax?
By Saul
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:45pm
How dare Marty Walsh take away my Bill of Rights-protected right to abandon my personal property on a public way for mere quarters per hour! How dare he! Taxation without representation!
personal property that...
By SoBo-Yuppie2
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 3:29pm
makes our city dangerous and pollutes it.
Good for Walsh! Now we should have congestion pricing at all roadways leading into Boston.
The motor vehicle also drives
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 9:15am
The motor vehicle also drives our economy. We should charge more for street parking. We should also charge to park bicycles on sidewalks as well. Why should a pedal pushed be given that valuable real estate while I cannot use it? Maybe I'd like to park my grill there and have a few friends over. You're invited BoZo, but we will be watching the red sox, patriots and bruins. I know that grown men playing sports gets your panties in a twist though, but the offer is there regardless. We locals can be all inclusive as well you know.
The math doesn't work
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 2:03pm
I'll bite.
An auto requires a parking space that is, at minimum, 18'x7'. That's 126 sq ft, at $1.25/hr. That space could be used for lots of other productive things -- another lane of motor vehicle traffic, a bike lane, a parklet where folks could sit and eat and spend more money at restaurants and shops.
Locking a bike to a meter or other bike rack takes up what, 3 square feet? So since parking a car in Boston is $0.01/sq ft/hr, that means that you'd be setting up a bike parking meter to charge me 6 cents for my two hour stay. The cost of installing the meter and collecting the money would exceed the value of the revenue.
The 80s called...
By SoBo-Yuppie2
Sun, 12/04/2016 - 10:00am
Look a post from the 1980s!
Go Rams!
- The Original SoBo Yuppie.
You sound like swirly..
By Scauma
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:45pm
Anti-car everything huh
Yeah, right
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 5:15pm
That must be why I just bought another car last night. One that I will park in the Seaport on occasion and pay market rate to do so.
I merely oppose privilege and subsidy of inefficient and dangerous modes of transport. I also oppose blanket excuses for bad driving and the failure to require drivers to maintain skills. These encourage mayhem. I've made that abundantly clear.
Dichotomous thinking is a hallmark of intellectual sloth ... Or lack of facility of critical thinking.
What a loaded comment
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:47pm
Funny how the people who whine about "raising taxes" always try to convert "using a supply and demand market approach to resource management" to OMG RAISIN MAH TAXES!
Be honest: you just want to do whatever you feel whenever without having to share, or pay for it.
i mean
By Scumquistador
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:32pm
that would hardly make them in the minority. look at this planet lmao.
Car owners pay enough taxes
By Scauma
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:47pm
And I say that as a non-car owner. Excise taxes, sales taxes, tolls, etc. It's not like car drivers are getting some sort of pass that no one else is. You pay your city taxes, you should be able to use city streets.
Just like you pay the meter
By bgl
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:58pm
Just like you pay the meter to park your car on a metered street spot - which is more convenient and still much cheaper than a public parking garage.
The "pass" they are getting
By Kinopio
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 5:02pm
The "pass" they are getting is using extremely valuable public land for practically nothing while non car owners are not allowed to use that land. And the taxes they pay only cover about half of what the roads costs. Non car owners like you and me subsidize them heavily.
How many times do we have to hear this lie?
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 7:34pm
All those things add to about fifty percent of the cost of you driving.
Look it up. The tax foundation keeps stats.
Wow. Failure of basic research skills and critical thinking skills are correlated!
UPDATE: link to facts http://taxfoundation.org/article/gasoline-taxes-an...
I really hate this argument
By Marco
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 8:53am
about car owners and non-car owners and who is subsidizing who blah blah blah.
I am not disputing your facts swrrly, but an individual car owner like myself pays enough taxes to pay MY way on the city's and state's roads. What the non-car owner's money goes towards is what brings produce to their grocery stores, oil to their houses, gadgets to their doorstep, and mail to their mailboxes. Oh right, also: BUSES (that money you pay the T goes to managing their fleet and paying their staff, I wonder if the MBTA pays road tax on CNG or electricity? hmmm). The streets are not some gift/ entitlement only being used by "elites" who own cars, they are used by EVERYONE directly or indirectly. If non- car owners want to stop paying for roads, then all goods should then go to one central location and those people can then schlepp down to the port or terminal and carry their food, gadgets, mail, etc home via donkey. Car owners will pay heavier tax but we will then drive to the goods and service depot and haul our stuff away, honking and waving at the pitiful masses making a 2 day journey for cheez-its.
Most if not all of the damage public roads suffer is due to heavy trucks and buses travelling them day after day. Look at Storrow Dr. (aside from the sections that go under bridges, which suffer weather and water damage) and see how much better shape it is in and how much longer it goes without being repaved than the highways or other roads heavily travelled by tractor trailers.
I am not opposed to paying higher meter rates (they raised them recently anyways, this will go like T-fares until we riot) but I really get tired of people who think drivers paying more to drive is some kind of righteous solution because WHAAA I DON'T DRIVE WHY AM I PAYING FOR ROADS?!?!
No, you don't.
By erik g
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 9:57am
No, you don't, which is exactly the point Swirly's making upthread. You probably paid a couple hundred bucks in excise tax, plus a 2-digit sum in gas tax, unless you drive really long distances to work. You really think that comes close to covering what the state and city doled out to manage all the infrastructure needed to support driving in Boston? If you count road construction and repair, infrastructure maintenance, environmental externalities, and all the other myriad costs cars impose on the rest of us, car owners pay nowhere near their share. Which by definition means they're being subsidized from other sources/people. And I say that as a person who usually drives to work. It should be WAY more expensive to drive and park in the city.
Swrrly's link
By Marco
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 10:44am
notes that NATIONWIDE it costs 5.1 cents per mile to maintain the roads. In MA drivers pay 58% thru tolls and tax. Of the remainder that is "subsidized," .9 cents comes from FEDERAL MONIES GENERATED THRU FEDERAL GAS TAX (so again, by DRIVERS). So 1.2 cents (or under 2 cents lets say since MA specific stats were not available in the link) out of the 5.1 it costs to maintain the road is paid for through revenue that DRIVERS do not generate. My opinion is that this amount is fair considering non drivers all still benefit from having roads. They use buses, they buy products trucked into their local stores, repairmen can get to their homes via roads, USPS delivers via the roads, and so on. I benefit from that as well, and lets not forget that the "subsidized" money comes from drivers' pockets too ASIDE from what we pay individually for the privilege of car ownership, but to use my personal vehicle I PAY excise tax, gas tax, tolls, insurance, parking fees (meters, garages, deeded spot, etc), registration renewal, license renewal, and so on. MA is one of the most expensive states to operate a car in. I don't think it is fair to label drivers as special snowflakes who think they are entitled to special privileges. There definitely are those out there who piss and moan about small raises in things like meter rates etc. I am not one of them.
You didn't read it
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 11:20am
It gives a state-by-state breakdown - MA is relatively high at a bit over 50%
MEANWHILE less than half the households in Boston have cars. That means that the subsidy is even more extreme because fewer registered cars means less local tax on those cars meaning more comes from property taxes.
Adds up, if you can actually add.
I did read it
By Marco
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 4:00pm
and in MA its actually a lot closer to 60% than 50, but we're splitting hairs. Would all those households be ok if we just tore up all the roads and put housing in its place? How would goods and services get around the city? When you break your leg how will you get to the hospital. Not in a cab or ambulance apparently. Ric-shaws could be the next big start up in the city I guess. OH WAIT they need paths or "roads" to move down. Guess you're just screwed, we'll have to put down people with broken legs as if they were horses now. Property taxes are meant to pay for city services and infrastructure, roads are part of that. And drivers pay the property tax along with all the associated fees, taxes, and tolls to use the roads as well. At least non-drivers/ car owners only pay the property taxes. The rest they throw away on a much more efficient use of their money: THE MBTA! hahahahahahaha
Fleets
By blues_lead
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 12:26pm
The cost of roads will also be borne by delivery fleets, the cost of goods by truck will rise a little bit, and the consumers will pay that way. But! That means that there is more incentive to use less damaging ways to transport goods, either by rail, or consuming more locally produced food, or other changes. It puts the economic and environmental incentives in sync.
A deeded parking space in
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:10pm
A deeded parking space in Back Bay is worth hundreds of thousands of dollars. Why should you be able to park there for $1.25 an hour? If you could buy such a spot, just the mortgage interest and taxes would 2-3x what the meter charges you today.
Yes!
By baepp
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 2:47pm
It is perfect! Well done, Boston.
Raising taxes? That's
By Mike S
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:19pm
Raising taxes? That's laughable!
First off, residents of Boston get stickers that give them essentially free parking where they live and they're most likely to take the T around town. I bet 95% of those who use parking meters don't live in Boston and using another city's public parking is something you're welcome to complain about, but it's not a 'tax.' This pricing is still cheaper than a garage, it's just now the city isn't absurdly pricing parking at far-below private parking rates--but it's still cheaper!
Still way too cheap
By TetOn
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 3:31pm
This approach will only work when the prices become competitive with garage parking in that neighborhood, which is probably a lot closer to $20/hr. Peak demand times, meters should be right up there in that range and you will magically have empty spaces available.
There are benfits to being sub-market price
By Gary C
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:07pm
If you know you'll have to pay say $16 for an hour of parking in location X, you simply will not travel to location X if all you were going there for was to make a quick purchase (which could include stopping at a bar for a drink.) If you think you can probably park at a meter for a few dollars, you will come. There is a mid-ground between too cheap and encouraging long term parking and being too expensive where people don't come to spend money at the local shops.
I don't understand
By Marco
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:38pm
this and other comments that are talking about the cheap rate causing people to park at a meter for a full day. Have any of you parked in and around Boston before? there is a 2 hour limit on meter parking, after which your car needs to be on a different block. Not one space up, not a couple spaces away, ON THE NEXT BLOCK. If BTD isn't ticketing these offenses why is that our problem? This also is going to do nothing to "relieve congestion." What a bullshit statement that is! You think because its $2 more to park that magically people will avoid trying to park in those areas? Are you people insane?
I'm not hemming and hawing over the increase, okay. If I were me (and I am) I will still pay those prices to park over there, because parking in a garage/lot is still triple the price. However, don't tell me this is going to relive congestion, or that less people will try and park over there because that is just fantasy. A lot of people parking in these areas are not tourists per se but are also not regular neighborhood residents (psssst, that's why they're DRIVING). You think someone is gonna roam around, score a parking spot then go "$3.75! This is outrageous I'm leaving!" No, they will just pay it or sulk to a garage and get hosed.
Christ Mahty you are so full of shit your eyes are brown. Just call it what it is, FUNDRAISING.
2 HR limit on meters
By Qsdrfn
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:19pm
Not in the seaport. construction workers park at the same meter all day long... some use handicap placards which is a whole other issue.
What streets in seaport?
By Marco
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 8:25am
Last week I was down there to meet some family and the meter I parked at on D st (on that first block off Seaport blvd) was indeed a 2 hr limit with a sticker on it and everything. I'm not calling you a liar, just wondering. Maybe some are unlimited BECAUSE of all the construction going on down there, so the workers can park. I dunno if the city would do that but it wouldn't surprise me.
Back Bay for sure has the 2 hour limit. When I worked down there that was a constant frustration of mine, moving my car every 2 hours on the rare days I had to drive to work.
I would tend to agree that if
By eherot
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 7:09pm
I would tend to agree that if you really want to do market pricing correctly, you have to get rid of the hourly limits (restaurant owners hate those anyway).
2 or 4 hour
By Tuckerman
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 8:45am
Depending where you are in Boston. Where I work, there are 4-hour meters. So if I drive in, I just have to pop out out my lunch break and move my car.
Having drunk drivers on our
By Kinopio
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:47pm
Having drunk drivers on our streets is a benefit?!?
I don't drink and drive, but many people can handle
By MC Slim JB
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:37pm
a drink or two and still drive legally and safely. Of course, your weight, the size and efficiency of your liver, total ABV consumed, and absorption factors like the amount of food in your stomach matter. I wouldn't give Gynneth Paltrow the keys after she did a shot of Everclear at 5pm with nothing to eat that day but a kale / wheatgrass / bee-pollen smoothie for breakfast, for instance.
Another example: your one drink should not be the Zombie Punch at Drink in Fort Point, an original by Don the Beachcomber, the genius who single-handedly invented the Tiki cocktail genre at his eponymous early-1930s Hollywood bar. (Most people have only tasted the dreadful, debased versions popularized by bad American-Polynesian-Chinese restaurants -- looking at you, Hong Kong Scorpion Bowl. You can find the real deal at a few serious bars in town: Drink, The Hawthorne, Eastern Standard, Hojoko, UNI, backbar, Green Street, Yvonne's, a few others. Recommended.)
The Zombie Punch (recipe below) has the equivalent of five ounces of rum in it. It is gorgeous and delicious and judgment-impairing enough that you might consider ordering a second one, but Drink wisely caps it at one per customer.
Don the Beachcomber's Zombie Punch recipe
By MC Slim JB
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:39pm
Recreated through careful historical research by the great Beachbum Berry. (His Tiki+ app is a bible for my summer entertaining, though I drink proper Tiki cocktails even in the winter.) Get to his New Orleans real-Tiki bar, Latitude 29, if you possibly can.
3/4 oz fresh lime juice
1/2 oz Don's mix (one of The Master's many custom spice syrups, this one grapefruit/cinnamon)
1/2 oz falernum (a Caribbean lime/almond/ginger/allspice cordial, some versions ~9% ABV, some 0%)
1.5 oz gold Puerto Rican rum
1.5 oz aged Jamaican rum
1 oz 151-proof Lemon Hart Demerara rum
1 dash Angostura bitters (the little bottle, not their new amaro)
6 drops (1/8 tsp) Pernod
1 tsp grenadine
3/4 cup crushed ice
Blend all ingredients at high speed for no more than five seconds. (Drink doesn't use electric blenders, hand-crushes their ice instead.) Pour into a chimney glass. (Drink uses really cool ceramic Tiki mugs.) Add ice cubes to fill. Garnish with a mint sprig. (Drink uses a whole fistful, lovely and fragrant.)
Donald Shoup is the leading
By blues_lead
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 9:07am
Donald Shoup is the leading expert on this stuff. He's found that in congested cities, about 20 to 30% of all vehicles are circling for parking.
If the price drives you away, good, that's the point. It means that the space you would have used opens up, and someone else not driven away will be able to use it, whereas before they would have had to circle for another ten minutes. There is a balance, yes, which is why meters that aren't used as often will have lower rates than they do now. The goal of price variability is to have about one or two spaces open per block. That way most parking is used and paid for, but you can always find a spot.
or you know..
By Scauma
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:49pm
We can give people a break sometimes and not charge them out the arse for something as simple as parking.
Taking up extremely valuable
By Kinopio
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:53pm
Taking up extremely valuable real estate isn't "simple". Car drivers get billions in breaks every year. Where is the break for people who don't drive? Why can't I store my personal property downtown for a dollar an hour? I'd love to set up my grill and patio furniture by the waterfront and have taxpayers subsidize me.
Oh please. "Extremely
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 8:54am
Oh please. "Extremely valuable" real estate? The streets were designed with parking in mind. People drive, get over it. Not everyone lives in the city and pedals. And how is a parking spot subsidized? You pay for it or you don't. Show me exactly where it is subsidized?
Nope
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 9:30am
They were designed for horses and carts, and paved for cycling.
So when the "modern" streets
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 11:52am
So when the "modern" streets were installed, along with curbs, sidewalks and meters, this was not intended for auto parking? The meters were put in place so you can lock your bicycle to it, for free?
The Back Bay got its curbs
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 5:30pm
The Back Bay got its curbs (in their exact current layout) before the car era. Of course the meters have been there for a while at this point.
Did they ever get over the misguided historic preservation stupidity that was blocking curbside bike posts?
*sigh*
By erik g
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 10:03am
[citation needed]
Streets are designed to allow people and goods to move around the city. Nothing anywhere guarantees you your very own 12x6 foot section of pavement.
As was mentioned upthread, a deeded parking space in Beacon Hill or Back Bay is hundreds of thousands of dollars. Divide that mortgage payment by the number of hours in a business day, and tell me if you get $1.25 back. Go on, I'll wait. Because if you don't, you're not paying market rate, which means someone (specifically, the city of Boston and its taxpayers) is subsidizing you so you don't have to go park in the garage around the corner.
A deeded parking spot is
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 11:49am
A deeded parking spot is private property while a public parking spot is public property.
Exactly. They're different
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 5:31pm
Exactly. They're different products. You can't divide the mortgage cost of buying a deeded space to determine the market rate for an hour of metered parking.
When you pay the meter for 2
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 6:27pm
When you pay the meter for 2 hours, you 'own' that spot for 2 hours. When you get an occupancy permit for 2 days, you own that space for two days. That's how the city sees it.
Metered street parking is public space rented out for private use, in 12 minute increments. It's not comparable to a sidewalk or travel lanes used for transit.
The notion that public parking is supposed to be free of charge because of you pay gas tax is just weird.
I'd love to set up my grill
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 10:25am
No you wouldn't, cause that's hugely impractical and you're just using hyperbole to whine about something you have an unhealthy obsession with. The break you get is not spending money on insurance, upkeep, and depreciation. Use the cash you save to go buy a smoothie and chill out.
That isn't a "break"
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 11:22am
That's called PAYING for what you use.
Sorry, but I'm really tired (as a car owner) hearing about how OH SORRY ME I"M BEING FLEECED when I know damn well that I'm not even paying my way!
yeah actually I agree
By anon
Fri, 12/02/2016 - 4:28pm
Paying fair market value is exactly that - fair. As a not so wealthy driver, I'm fine with the economic incentive to explore alternate transportation versus a scarce commodity offered for way too cheap. But some of these staunch anti-vehicle people are straight up psycho and their idea of compromise is abolishing cars altogether. So, one crappy argument follows another, I suppose. It was mostly in jest, and I have no victim complex paying the cost of ownership for a luxury.
You want free parking?
By Saul
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:59pm
You want free parking?
Start at Copley Square, take Huntington Avenue, continue along Route 9, and you'll find malls aplenty with free parking.
(And, by the way, there's no such thing as "free" parking. Anywhere.)
There's nothing simple about
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 5:18pm
There's nothing simple about parking in downtown Boston.
Free Public Transit
By spin_o_rama
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 7:32pm
We can give people a break sometimes and not charge them out the arse for something as simple as public transportation.
I wouldn't know where to pay
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:24pm
I wouldn't know where to pay $200 for 10 hours of garage parking if I wanted to.
Privitize
By Lunchbox
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:16pm
Sell the rights to the parking meters to a private company and let the market decide what the rates should be. The City has better things to do than monkey with parking prices.
As others note, parking shouldn't be a public right; nor should it be a public service.
No sales, leases maybe...
By anon
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:19pm
No sales, leases maybe...
Stop the looting of public infrastructure.
This did not go well in
By MattyC
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 4:24pm
This did not go well in Chicago.
Ok, but...
By Lunchbox
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 6:11pm
Just because they screwed it up in CHI doesn't mean it could never work. I misspoke when I said "sell" - have it be a licensing system with an upfront price, revenue sharing, and oversight of quality and price. Kinda like the casinos.
Not just CHI
By SwirlyGrrl
Thu, 12/01/2016 - 7:38pm
I know it sounds appealing, but I haven't actually heard of a city where privatization hasn't resulted in either a clusterflux or (like PDX) a bribery or skimming scandal.
Can you give us some examples of where it has worked?
Pages
Add comment