As Pace Struggles, CTA Claims "No Major Delays" After Doomsday Day One
CTA Doomsday Schedule: Day 2
Calumet Fisheries Wins James Beard Award
How To: Roast a Chicken (If You're an Idiot)
30 Percent Chance Of Hailey
In a symbolic move, 33rd Ward Alderman and Rules Committee Chairman Dick Mell and 38th Ward Alderman and Transportation Committee Chairman Tom Allen are demanding that the Chicago Park District cancel its plans to install meters in over 4,000 parking spots in lakefront spaces. "The slogan is, 'Come out and play', not 'come out and pay.' We want to revisit this. People own the lakefront. People own the beach. In this economy, that's the only vacation people can afford," Allen told the Sun-Times. The Park District announced in May that they would begin charging for parking this fall. Mayor Daley, already bruised and battered from voter outrage over the parking meter privatization debacle, dodged comment on the matter, telling the Tribune, "That's the park district."
Regardless, aldermanic pressure on the Park District may not be worth much more than a few soundbites and a re-election talking point. That's because the district's board is appointed by the mayor and the city council has no say in the matter. "The way we view it here is adding a small fee that will impact those actually using the service, in this case, about $1-an-hour to park at the beach is better than having a property tax increase," said Jessica Maxey-Faulkner, spokeswoman for Tim Mitchell, a long-time Daley political organizer and superintendent of the parks. Mitchell devised the plan earlier this year in an effort to stave off cuts in park services and layoffs of workers. Fees from parking are expected to bring in an additional $700,000 a year.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I've got to hand it to Alderman Mell, at least he took the time to read this proposal.
I've got to hand it to Ald. Mell, at least he took the time to read this proposal.
P.S. Commenting on this site really sucks! Come on Chicagoist, you can do better.
As soon as I heard about the Park District's plan to add parking meters I thought that this is just the city creating another revenue source to privatize. My guess is that soon after the next municipal election we will be hearing about the sale of the park district parking meter lease for the next 75-99 years. Since it is park district the city council has no voice in the deal and is not subject to any review outside the park district board.
seems like the money that will be needed to pay the cops/metermaids that will undoubtedly have to monitor all those cars up and down the lakefront might cancel out or at least decrease any profits from the meters themselves.
seems like the money that will be needed to pay the cops/metermaids that will undoubtedly have to monitor all those cars up and down the lakefront might cancel out or at least decrease any profits from the meters themselves.
if you're too lazy to ride a bike, take CTA, or walk to the park...then I have little sympathy. Most people I see at Montrose Beach are able-bodied individuals.
you cannot expect parking to be free, just like I cannot expect the El to be free.
deal with it.
If you've seen beaches other than Montrose, you might have noticed that many of these people who will be affected by this are scores of working-class families.
Of course people can expect parking at the beach to be free, because it's been that way for decades. Is this plan anyhow related to the upswing of single white college graduates who've flooded this city in the past 15 years? Perhaps this is a message that working-class people aren't welcome in a city they pay taxes to just like everyone else. Going to the beach should not be a privilege offered only to the highest bidders.
This is what Daley and Chicago business interests are after...clearing the city of working-class families (who work all the jobs you don't want) to make more room for the endlessly expanding demographic of upper middle-class white twentysomethings.
Of course people can expect parking at the beach to be free, because it's been that way for decades.
Just because they've been free for decades doesn't mean it's always going to stay that way. It's not an entitlement.
Going to the beach should not be a privilege offered only to the highest bidders.
So does that mean you think going to the beach is a right, not a privilege? Makes no sense.
If the beach-going Chicago citizens people are so poor, then why are they driving to the beach? And yes, I've seen more beaches than Montrose. I was born and raised in South Shore, dork. Go back to Downers Grove.
And if increased parking fees means better maintenance or at the very least the funding of city government, all the better. And consider the costs of people driving cars in general -- driving is privilege, not a right and this right costs money. Deal with it.
I do believe the lakefront should be free. But if you choose to drive, then be prepared to pay for it.
If the beach-going Chicago citizens people are so poor, then why are they driving to the beach?
Because only rich people drive. No one with, say, a number of kids or older people is driving to the beach either. Nah, it's all richy-rich people in their hummers.
And yes, I've seen more beaches than Montrose. I was born and raised in South Shore, dork. Go back to Downers Grove.
Oooh. Burn. The south shore eh? That would explain your sparkling wit and oodles of charm. Seriously, you're George Clooney-ing all over my keyboard baby!
And if increased parking fees means better maintenance or at the very least the funding of city government, all the better.
What fantasy land do you live in where money from a given source is actually poured back into improvements for that specific area? That money is going to pay off city lawsuits, Olympic insurance, budget shortfalls and general graft/patronage hires. South Shore must be the Worker's Paradise.
And consider the costs of people driving cars in general
Again, don't worry. All I see at the public beaches in the summer are Bentleys and Aston Martins. They can afford it.
-- driving is privilege, not a right and this right costs money.
Language is privilege too.
Deal with it.
I'm curious, in your work as an oncologist, do you mainly work from referrals?
I do believe the lakefront should be free. But if you choose to drive, then be prepared to pay for it.
Listen, if you've read this far, let me go a little farther. The notion that the city does anything involving revenue for the benefit of the people is complete fiction. This is more money taken from people's pockets by a pack of thieves, thugs and liars. You think you're not affected because you don't choose to drive? Wrong. The parking meter deal? That's going to cost the CTA and cyclists and interfere with city planning for decades to come. Wasteful government costs EVERYONE.
You want to posture and say "deal with it" like some keyboard courage internet tough-guy, good on you. But you're getting bent over and rammed hard by the city one way or another. Just because your house is next to a house on fire does not mean you should start a gasoline fight.
Wow, you attached the person and not their arguement a lot more in that than I've ever seen before. I think you should re-read your last paragraph, especially the first line, and look in the mirror after that post.
But anywho, if you read this, can you please explain to me your thought on this statement?
The parking meter deal? That's going to cost the CTA and cyclists and interfere with city planning for decades to come.
Especially as it relates to the CTA.