Wednesday, February 25, 2009

Who should run L.A.'s parking meters?


Are the city's meters better off in the hands of the public or private sector? Another question: Would such a deal prevent the L.A. City Council from sometimes funneling excess parking meter revenue to their pet projects?



In a bid to potentially raise hundreds of millions of dollars or more for ailing city coffers, Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa is exploring whether to lease the cityʼs parking structures and meters to a private party to operate.
The mayor in recent weeks has quietly begun building a team of financial experts and attorneys who could advise him in structuring a deal. In December, Chicago Mayor Richard Daley -- whose city is also grappling with a big budget hole -- signed a deal that gave his city $1.15 billion in up-front cash in exchange for leasing the cityʼs roughly 36,000 meters for 75 years to infrastructure funds overseen by Morgan Stanley. (Here's a link to Daley's news release on the deal, and here's a link to a Chicago City Council agenda from December with more details of the deal).
How does the deal work? Morgan Stanley gets to keep all revenue from the meters for the 75 years. That's a nice stream of cash that currently amounts to about $20 million annually but will probably be more after significant rate hikes that were part of the deal go into effect.
And what's in it for Chicago's citizens? First and foremost, a big shot of cash that the city otherwise wouldn't have. More than $600 million is going into balancing the city's budget through 2012, and another $400 million is being set aside to generate interest to replace the meter revenue lost.
But it is the deal's fine print that raised eyebrows. As part of the deal, the city significantly raised meter rates for the first time in years, in some cases quadrupling them. The city also required Morgan Stanley to install better meters and retained the right to both write parking tickets and keep parking ticket revenue. However, Morgan Stanley won the right to do "supplemental enforcement" -- meaning the parking concessionaire they hire can also write tickets to help teach people what happens if they forget to plug meters.
"The mayor intends to move forward with a parking structure deal that makes the most sense for the long-term fiscal health of the city," said Matt Szabo, a Villaraigosa press secretary. "We are also aggressively exploring the possibility of a private partnership for the operation of the city's parking meters.
"While it's cliche to say the devil is in the details, in this case it really is," he added. "The final proposals will be fully vetted before the council, and will receive a thorough hearing before the public. But the mayor is confident that, even in this tough economy, we can implement a much smarter, more efficient way to provide parking services in this city while generating the revenue to preserve other critical city services at the same time."
The city of Los Angeles has managed about 43,000 parking meters for decades, and the results are there for everyone to see: Until a recent meter replacement project got underway, about 10% to 15% of the meters were broken at any given time, either because of vandalism or mechanical failure. Unlucky motorists who legally park at failed meters have also found they have a habit of resetting to healthy mode, often resulting in a ticket when a meter officer wandered past.

Tuesday, February 17, 2009

Parking meter rates increase, how is it affecting you?



Parking Rate Increase while Decreases Parking

As many may have noticed, the City has decided to raise the price you pay at parking meters, and those increases have been showing up all around town. In Lincoln Heights for instance, the parking lot behind the 99¢ has increased the rates by 400%. One dollar an hour might not seem that much to some, but it’s really exorbitant for many working people.




What is the effect of these crazy prices? Nobody is parking in the parking lot. This is around 11:30 on Sunday Feb 15, a time when this lot would normally be almost full from people shopping on N. Broadway. Like many others, I went and found a spot on the non-metered neighborhood streets nearby. This is a crazy sight, If you’ve ever been in this lot on a pre-increase day, you’ll know what I mean.


Tuesday, February 10, 2009

Obama is no pushover.



So where is the guy who once symbolized hope? Well, he is still there. Roughed up a little already, but still there. Barack Obama has a tough act to pull off. He must simultaneously petrify people and also restore their confidence. He must scare us to death and calm our fears.

He must convince the nation that the times are so dire we must carry out his bold plans immediately, and then he must persuade us to be patient and give his plans time to work.

Obama gave two shows Monday: a matinee in Elkhart, Ind., and an evening performance in Washington. He was calm and forceful at both. He made one joke at his town meeting in Elkhart about drinking beer and one joke at his news conference in Washington about how much Joe Biden talks (always good for a laugh).

But other than that, he was utterly serious. Make that grim.

Some people who have lost their jobs "have no idea what to do or who to turn to," he said at the news conference. Some people are going hungry, and food banks "don't have enough to meet the demand."
He used phrases like "full-blown crisis" and "vicious cycle." And he said that unless we do something quickly, "we may be unable to reverse" the crisis we face.

Nor should his stimulus and bailout plans, as massive as they are, be considered a complete fix. "Given the magnitude of the challenges we have, any single thing we do is going to be part of solution and not all of the solution," he said.

"The party," he said, "now is over."

No kidding.

Oh, and the war in Afghanistan isn't going that well either. "It is going to be difficult" to win there, and "I do not yet have a timetable for how long it is going to take," he said.

And for those who look for relief in sports, don't look for relief in sports.


It was that kind of day.


The massive spending bill Obama is now shepherding through Congress is not how he envisioned spending his time. "Look, I would love not to have to spend money right now," he said. "The thought that I came in here ginned up to spend $800 billion, that wasn't how I envisioned my presidency beginning."

But that is how it is beginning. If we unite, however, and "change our bad habits" and Congress agrees to do something, then we can climb out of this. Slowly. Not this year.

"My hope is after a difficult year - - and this is going to be a difficult year - - if we get things right, starting next year we can see things improving," Obama said.

But he also said: "I am absolutely confident that we can solve this problem."

What he refuses to do, however, "is return to the failed theories of the last eight years, which got us into this fix in the first place."

Which means that, contrary to what Republicans tell us, government is not the problem, government is the solution and right now the government is going to have to spend a lot of money to get us out of this mess.

"As long as I hold this office, I will do whatever it takes to put this country back to work," Obama promised. "I have full faith and confidence."

We can do it, he said. We must change our attitudes and ways and act swiftly and decisively even though some in Congress want to do nothing.

Which is what Congress is best at, isn't it?

But don't worry. Things will get better.

"I am the eternal optimist," Obama said

I am glad that somebody is.

Monday, February 2, 2009

Is ESPN's latest NBA ad homophobic? Does a basketball bounce?

It wouldn't feel like Super Bowl Sunday without some sort of homophobic sports ad controversy popping up and, sure enough, one has. Ironically, however, it has nothing to do with Super Bowl 43.Rather this controversy has to do with the following ad which recently ran on ESPN starring Shaquille O'Neal Great, another ad playing on the idea that men being affectionate with each other is something objectionable. So objectionable that it provokes Shaq to call it "weird" and "disgusting" and causes him to move away. What were you thinking ESPN? That being said, keep in mind, that ESPN has a pretty good record on gay issues and that Shaq himself helped chase down some gay-bashers a couple of years ago and has stated he'd protect a gay teammate.