Yet another disincentive |

Yet another disincentive

Dear Editor:

You want bigger government, well here it comes. No bureaucracy was ever formed that didn’t need to grow in order to justify its purpose.

The suggestion of increasing paid parking coverage is an unpleasant reminder of our government’s subtle but ominous need to become bigger. Unless the city is about to put gates (as has often been suggested) at the entrance to stop all commerce, this town will continue to be crowded. Get used to it! The occasional annoyance of finding a parking spot is insignificant when compared with the real problem on the end of Main Street that the city has been petrified to address in any way (except for paid parking) for years. It is naive to expect that a change in parking policy will solve that problem. At least right now there is assurance that every two hours parking spaces come available. Once the streets are at capacity with day-parkers, then where will the open spaces be located? Where would the city suggest we park at that point? Oh, I forgot, just raise prices, that’ll fix it!

This isn’t about parking; it’s about money and the city government’s motivation to manipulate “or else” profit from the activities of every person who enters this town. Shouldn’t it be about what is right for this great community of which the work force is a vital component? If the revenue from parking was used to create new alternative parking solutions such as a new parking structure, the city would at least look like it was trying to resolve the issue from both sides. But for now, it is sad to see the council considering an idea that is yet one more disincentive for valley locals to consider coming to town to work, let alone on their day off.

What’s next … nighttime paid parking to tap into the restaurant crowd?

Ward Johnson, DDS



See more