The Municipal Services Committee met 01/08/2024. One of the items they took up was the Parking Facility and Management Study resolution. As originally written by Alderperson Chad Doran (District 15), this resolution called for staff to seek the services of a consultant to help them assess the value a conditions of the city’s publicly-owned parking assets, look at best management practices, and develop a downtown marketing and promotional campaign.
By way of background, the city’s parking utility has had $1.5 million dollars in American Rescue Plan Act funds allocated to it over the last couple years to make up for budget shortfalls. Additionally, it just had an additional $244,000 in ARPA funds allocated to it to pay for maintenance projects.
Staff estimated that the study called for in the resolution would cost in the $75,000 range, and if approved could be paid for out of the $100,000 that had been budgeted in 2024 for wayfinding and marketing of the parking utility.
Controversially, the resolution contained language requesting that the report on best management practices include information on “the sale or lease of parts of all of the parking utility”. This language was the reason why the committee had previously voted to recommend the resolution for denial before Alderperson Katie Van Zeeland (District 5) requested that it be sent back to the committee for further discussion.
Alderperson Van Zeeland made a motion to approve an amended version of the resolution that did not contain the language about investigating selling or leasing the parking ramps. This amended version was approved by a vote of 3-2 with Alderpersons Vered Meltzer (District 2), Van Zeeland, and Kristin Alfheim (District 11) voting in favor of it and Alderpersons William Siebers (District 1) and Doran voting against it.
I’ve prepared a transcript of the discussion for download:
Alderperson Doran desired that a study of the parking utility provide an all-encompassing look at the city’s parking assets. He wanted a professional to tell the city how best to manage its downtown parking. The language regarding investigating selling or leasing the ramps was simply part of the comprehensive nature of the study.
The city had already invested in a downtown parking study back in 2015 (which I have included below), and some of the committee members were unsure of what the purpose of a new study would be. Alderperson Alfheim specifically was bothered by the idea of conducting a new study when all of the recommendations from the 2015 study (particularly the recommendations regarding marketing the downtown parking ramps) had not been enacted. She also did not like the idea of taking ¾ of the $100,000 that had been budgeted in 2024 to improve wayfinding and signage for the ramps and instead spend it on this new study.
Director of Public Works Danielle Block explained that the 2015 study specifically focused on taking a supply/demand look at downtown parking and making sure the city had the correct number of 30-minute, hourly, etc. parking spots. She believed that much of what had been recommended in the study had been executed with the exception of a marketing campaign.
The study called for by the resolution was focused on best management practices and the policies for the Parking Utility. It would look at things like designated stall purchase policies, special event parking, whether or not there were better ways to manage special events, major events, and PAC events, how to optimize the ramps during Octoberfest. The city also had surface parking lots (non-parking ramps) and skywalks, many of which included agreements with private entities, so a study would also look at how those agreements were managed.
There was general opposition to including the language regarding selling or leasing the city’s parking assets.
Alderperson Meltzer felt there was value in trying to optimize the parking utility’s policies and procedures but said, “I don’t need to pay a consultant to know that selling or leasing our ramps is going to increase costs for the users. And I don’t need a consultant to tell me that it’s going to save money for the city. What privatizing or selling or leasing would do would be to displace the cost from the city on to our residents. Right now, we have a beautiful system set up with a parking utility. We are able to keep costs low in a way that really helps to nurture the vitality of downtown. I don’t need a consultant to tell me that putting the ramps into a different type of management condition would change that, would break that irreparably in a way that there’s no going back from.” [I didn’t understand the claim that privatizing the ramps would “displace the cost from the city on to our residents.” If the rates are already artificially below what a market-rate necessary to maintain solvency would be, then would not all of the city’s taxpayers be shouldering the cost whether they use the parking ramps or not. It seems like privatizing them would result in only the people who utilize the ramps being the ones to shoulder the cost of the ramps, thus removing a burden from residents.]
Alderperson Doran, who is a member of the committee, and Alderperson Sheri Hartzheim (District 13), who is not on the committee, felt that there was needless fear surrounding the concept of having a study include information on leasing or selling the ramps. Their perspective is that people assumed that a consultant would come back with a recommendation to sell or lease and that that recommendation would be bad for the city overall, but one of the purposes of hiring a consultant was to provide a full, professional assessment of the situation and it was foolish to specifically not allow them to look at all issues and options.
Alderperson Van Zeeland wanted to make sure that the parking utility was not losing money and that, if they needed to raise rates, they would be able to do so in an informed way. She recognized that staff wanted to this study done. She also did not see how removing that line from the resolution would preclude the city or the Council from making a decision about leasing or selling in the future. “I’m trying to find a compromise to help our staff get the study that they need and to pass Alder Doran’s resolution. That’s what I see this as, as a compromise that may exit palatable for everyone. So, this isn’t a matter of me being afraid of anything. This is a matter of how can how can we get the most out of this resolution in front of us? And how can we help staff and help shore up the parking facility that we need for our downtown businesses?”
The committee ended up voting 3-2 to recommend the amended resolution for approval with Alderpersons Meltzer, Van Zeeland, and Alfheim voting in favor of it and Alderpersons Siebers and Doran voting against.
[I come away from this discussion feeling that there has been major failures across several levels of our city government. (1) I don’t believe it’s unreasonable to expect city staff to possess the skills and knowledge to run our parking assets in a way that keeps the parking utility solvent. We have had parking ramps in this city since at least 1963. City-owned parking assets are not a new thing, and being able to competently manage them seems like it ought to simply be a part of staff’s job expectations. (2) If we have key staff members who don’t know how to manage our parking utility, that would speak to potential administrative failures by Mayor Woodford and former Mayor Hanna in hiring knowledgeable people. (3) I did not get the impression that any of the Council members had any kind of cogent response to the major budgetary issues the parking utility is experiencing. I’m incredibly jaded about the value of consultants, and I kind of think that hiring consultants is just a way to avoid having to take on the responsibility of serious decision-making.
Ultimately, it seems absurd to me that our city even has a parking utility if nobody is willing or able to take responsibility for it and city staff members and elected officials are trying to slough of decision making onto a consultant.]
View full meeting details and video here: https://cityofappleton.legistar.com/MeetingDetail.aspx?ID=1161960&GUID=3435E572-917E-49A0-8DD2-BF52AF11696D
3 thoughts on “Municipal Services Committee Approves Amended Parking Facilities Study Resolution Removing Reference To Studying The Possible Lease Or Sale Of City-Owned Parking Ramps”