When the issue of the parking system budget deficit came up recently, various proposals were discussed, at times heatedly, to solve the problem. Night parking fees, student fees, increases in revenues and so forth were all debated.
In the end, the parking system administrators were charged with reducing costs to make up most of the deficit. Apparently these same parking system administrators have found another way to raise revenues, which is under the radar screen of public scrutiny -- charging exorbitant increases in parking fees for trivial or nonexistent increases in the "quality" of parking spaces.
I speak of the plan to gate the 440 W. Franklin St. parking lots. True, this plan may prevent a few, say 10 or less, people from using this area to park when they go to a restaurant. But in return, employees will now have the traffic hassles of entering gated lots from a busy street and the pleasure of paying a 58 percent increase in parking fees.
Increased revenue from the lot as a result of the fee increase will raise an additional $34,000 in monies to help the parking system overcome its budget deficit.
In truth, people who work off campus are penalized in our parking fees and are forced to subsidize people who park on campus and who share in campus benefits.
Where is the outcry? Just because state employees who work off campus are in the minority and are neither faculty nor students, does this give the administration the ability to force unreasonable and unasked-for fee increases and campus subsidies down our throats with impunity?
Where is the outcry from the students on this obvious injustice? Where is the outcry from our faculty on this abuse of authority? I suspect the real reason that there is no outcry is that it would affect their pocketbooks.
I am not part of the campus-parking problem, but my wallet obviously is part of the solution.
