Albany Residential Parking Permits Review Website

Published in the Albany Times Union

First published: Monday, June 25, 2001

Parking editorial was short on specifics

The June 14 editorial "A double standard'' cries out for rebuttal.

The argument presented by the Times Union is that the state Senate should adopt the proposed permit parking legislation, because a number of other cities and towns ostensibly have some form of permit parking. The Times Union accuses senators of having a double standard because some of the localities with permit parking are in the constituencies of key senators.

The Times Union provides no specifics on the following relevant factors:

The adequacy of free or "affordable'' municipal parking for commuters.

The companies whose employees might be impacted by municipal permit systems and their policies (e.g. do they provide parking or facilitate transit arrangements for employees?)

Whether existing permit parking systems work adequately for all interests.

The fact that the state work force is the captive of politicians who wish to move it downtown for social engineering and political purposes, but don't want to spend the money to meet the needs of the state work force.

The preponderance of downtown Albany residents have moved there since the construction of the Empire State Plaza.

Finally, I believe the Times Union is guilty of a double standard, by being a fearsome advocate for downtown neighborhoods, vis-a-vis commuting state workers, while opting to have a suburban headquarters on Albany Shaker Road with ample free parking for its management and work force.

JEFFREY J. SATZ

Albany

The writer is the Public Employee Federations Region 8 coordinator and chairman of its parking committee.