(link repaired 2-5-11)
I didn't bother looking through the archives, but my guess is that here at NAC, we were debating the New Albany traditions of (a) poor strategic planning for downtown, and (b) ineffectual (read: non-existent) ordinance enforcement as far back as 2005 -- and we were very, very late to the wretchedly indicative game of wondering why simplicity comes here to die.
But what the hey; it's 2011, Fox-41 is right on top of matters, and that's not such a bad thing at all as a tool for renewed discussion, except that it's an election year, which means there'll be no discussion at all.
Welcome to NA.
New Albany: Unpaid parking tickets reach
FOX FOLLOW: Attorney won't pay ticket fine
Point of View: "Turning a Blind Eye to Parking Fines."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
Still the same question: Why should anyone pay a fine for anything while the City so blatantly ignores serial offenders?
Though his shot at the City Clerk for trying to do her job was unwarranted and there are clearly other places to park besides the street, Beardsley may or may not have a case to make about the ordinance itself. But, the same can be said for anyone who's received a ticket or fine during the same period, regardless of where in the city the alleged violation occurred.
Every other local citizen and/or their attorney should employ a "Beardsley defense" as a matter of basic civil rights. No one should pay a City fine until his and other more severe cases are pursued or every other fine issued during the same period is refunded.
Some people try to do the right thing. Others do the loophole thing. That's why so many laws and regulations are extremely long and complicated. We know where Mr. Beardsley stands.
Or parks.
Yes, we do know where Mr. Beardsley stands. Regardless of how anyone feels about his stance, though, I'm pretty sure we didn't elect him to run the city.
Ultimately, this falls on the mayor's office as that's where the city attorney's priorities are set.
Yep.
When a long standing business professional readily airs his scofflaw attitude for all to see, and when such a person is allowed to amass such large amount of fines with out having the vehicles towed off or booted, it speaks volumes as to the code enforcement of our fair town.
$239,000 for parking tickets.
How many millions would it be if other ordinances were fully enforced?
It's all part and parcel of the same overbearing song and dance:
Imagine if we had sensible land use regulations and enforced them rather than encouraging unnecessary sprawl that we can't sustain financially, environmentally, or culturally.
Imagine if we spent our development dollars to encourage the continuous, small scale, adaptive reuse of existing buildings and infrastructure rather than trying to finance major new developments for a scant few, weakening the commons rather than strengthening them.
Imagine if transportation planning and spending actually focused on providing resident mobility as efficiently as possible rather than serving the needs of those whose disproportionate influence and power are largely the result of not doing the above mentioned.
In terms of quality of life and a level playing field, we've been paying more and more for less and less and now the proposition, at least in Indiana, seems to be paying for less and less directly while raising the indirect costs of everything until they surpass what what we've been paying already.
Think of that $239,000 owed in parking tickets and read the ordinance:
How many pot holes could be fixed, salary for the traffic department at the NAPD, sidewalk and curb repair could be paid for with those funds.
Those are areas where we are lacking in this city, and the monies collected from parking fines are earmarked by ordinance to fund such things....
(A) All parking permit fee and fines, when collected by the City Clerk, shall be deposited with the City Controller, to the credit of the city, but in a special fund, which shall be disbursed and paid out only under the orders and directions of the Board of Public Works and Safety, and for the following purposes only:
(1) The printing cost of parking permits;
(2) The cost of maintenance, operation and repair of leased parking lots;
(3) Incidental costs and expenses in the operation of the parking lots, including the cost of clerks, parking enforcement officers, bookkeeping and necessary computer and/or database upgrades;
(4) The cost of traffic signal devices used in the municipality;
(5) The cost of repairing and maintaining any of the public ways, curbs and sidewalks surrounding leased parking lots and all public ways connected with them in the municipality;
(6) The cost of acquiring, by lease or purchase, suitable land for off-street parking facilities to be operated or leased by the municipality; and
(7) The cost of providing approved school crossing protective facilities, including the cost of purchase, maintenance, operation, repair and all other incidental costs.
(B) (1) All monies remaining in the city treasury to the credit of the fund shall not revert to the general funds of the city.
(2) Nothing herein contained shall prohibit the Common Council from transferring, by ordinance, at the end of the calendar year, the balance in the special fund to the general funds of the city.
(Ord. A-04-53, passed 9-10-2004)
Hail to the Troublemaker! Selective enforcement or rather non-enforcement is the living nightmare we call New Albany.
Say what you will, I love Stephen Beardsley. What a great character! NA is a much more interesting place with him around...
Post a Comment