When a policy has a disproportionate impact, our progressive tendency is to create another layer of policy to reduce the harm of the first one. In some cases, a better approach would be to scrap the original policy that doesn’t need to be there.
Oak Park’s overnight street parking ban is a good example. The village board is considering reducing overnight permit fees for housing voucher recipients. This will create another form to complete, another demand on village staff, and will only help a small set of lower-income residents. Please don’t make an unnecessary system even more complex. Simplify, and let people park on the street overnight without a permit.
I’ll address some common objections:
“How will streets get cleaned and plowed?”
Other towns work it out. In Berwyn, I could park on the street overnight, and we had street sweeping every week. One side of the block had no parking Thursdays, one side Fridays, no problem.
“No one will be able to find parking.”
Parking in dense areas is a pain, and it will always be an advantage to have a garage or assigned parking spot and use it. We don’t need to make parking more of a pain with an onerous system of fees that mainly impacts lower-income residents.
“We don’t want to be a car-centric village.”
Using overnight parking fees to keep certain people from having “too many” cars is paternalistic. If you want to limit cars using fees, increase the annual vehicle permit fee that everyone has to pay.
“The village needs revenue from overnight permits and parking tickets.”
This is true and it’s a problem. But these fees are a regressive tax on lower-income residents, and they’re not a good way to fund government.
“I want my street to look ‘nice,’ and I don’t want ‘those’ people parking in front of my house.”
If we’re honest, this is the reason why some Oak Parkers support the overnight parking ban. This is not a good basis for public policy, especially in a village that says it wants to be welcoming to a wide variety of people.
Jeremy West
Oak Park