The Jack London News
Tuesday, June 17, 2008

Nadel's Office Weighs In
Here's an email I received from Marisa Arrona in Nancy Nadel's office:

Dear “Feedback At Jack London News” ~

I am Councilmember Nadel’s Policy Analyst. I wrote the Staff Report recommending we amend the permit parking boundaries.

You are misinformed. The Amtrak parking lot, which will take three years to complete, will be for Amtrak commuters – not for Social Services employees who work more than 6 blocks away, nor “tenants of Jack London Square”. The permit parking program was proposed specifically to deal with COMMUTERS who park in the District all day for free, and to address the fact that the Amtrak parking lot will be closed for three years. In fact, the permit parking program will sunset in three years, when the garage opens.

Moreover, you are woefully and alarmingly misinformed when you state:
We've always been told that they wanted nothing to do with the parking permit plan - until it was implemented, and now suddenly they want the benefit.

The merchants south of Water Street NEVER said they “wanted nothing to do with the parking permit plan”(!) In fact, several of those merchants spoke with Gary Knect and other JLDA representatives, who REBUFFED the requests of the merchants to be included in the program.

The program must sell at least 1,100 permits to be “cost neutral.” So far we have sold *364* permits. In a deficit year, you can be sure the Council would END this program because the City is subsidizing it. Out of fairness, and indeed common business sense, we will include the merchants south of Embarcadero and the Social Services employees, most of whom are Oakland residents and deserve the same consideration given to the other merchants, employees, and residents of JLS.

Please forward THIS accurate email to everyone you know, to correct the absolute misinformation your previously included in your unnecessarily vitriolic email.
~ Marisa Arrona

and my response:

Marisa,

And you are woefully wrong as well.

The County and the Port had no parking to offer up, so why should they receive the priviledge? We had asked them time and time again to get involved in this and have never gotten any support. They have nothing to bring to the table.

Secondly, the parking garage is NOT for Amtrak commuters - that is the most false thing I've ever heard out of Nancy Nadel's office. That parking garage is specifically for Jack London Square as a source for parking for their tenants. Current tenants are to use the Washington Street Garage. Amtrak riders may choose to park in the Site G parking structure, but that is certainly not what it is being built for. Merchants/tenants in the square were rebuffed by Gary because they needed to talk to their landlord.

364 permits in SIX weeks is GREAT! If you didn't have the permit plan that would be $54,600 that the City wouldn't have because we'd still have free on-street parking. Oh, and then there's the $70 tickets - which have at least netted the city $28,000 (20 days of enforcement at a low estimation of 20 tickets at $70/ea). So in this deficit year, you should be thanking JLDA for helping you to pass the permit plan.

And when you tell us that the JLDA Mixed-Use Permit Plan needs to be revenue neutral - well, answer me the following questions:

1. Is the residential permit plan revenue neutral? In that revenue neutrality calculation be sure to include all the same costs that are included in the costs for the mixed-use plan?
2. Has the City hired an additional parking enforcement officer?
3. Has the City purchased an additional parking enforcement vehicle?
Posted 6/17/2008