Wednesday, May 17, 2006

Bad Public Policy 101

Would I be pissed off if I paid $90 to park by Fenway and the game got canceled? Absolutely. Does this mean city council president Michael Flaherty's plan to have parking lots give vouchers for canceled games is a good idea? Not a chance.

Think about it: parking rates are obscenely high for Sox games, and traffic in the Fenway is nightmarish. What the city should be doing is creating disincentives to drive in--say, by offering subway and commuter rail discounts. This would A) restore some sanity to the neighborhood and B) bring prices down for those who still insist on driving. By mandating vouchers, though, the city would actually be removing one of those disincentives--i.e., the fear that you'll spend a shitload to park for a game that never takes place.

The voucher plan was pretty popular at today's council meeting. No surprise there--it's just the kind of thing that promises to play well come election time. Credit Sam Yoon, though, for drawing a connection between affordable-housing issues and Flaherty's voucher plan. As Yoon correctly noted, Flaherty's proposal is based on a conviction that the city has a right to regulate transactions involving private property. And credit Yoon as well for noting that housing issues should probably be taking priority over protecting boneheads who inexplicably insist on driving to Sox games. (Those are my words, not his; what Sam actually said was, "My heart bleeds more, I guess, for others that are similarly feeling the effects of not having land. The root causes are the same--lack of space.")

5/17/2006 4:45:50 PM by Adam Reilly | Comments [5] |

Thursday, May 18, 2006 4:19:35 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Adam, what is your personal bias towards Flaherty? My sense is if Arroyo, Tuner or Yoon had offered this, you would have been singing their praises. Have you ever met him? He is one of the most sincere, articulate, genuine, and knowledgable politicans that this city has ever seen. In fact, I have had the opportunity to work with many councillors over the years. To date, I have no found no other councillor who responds quicker than councillor Flaherty and his staff. I see it as no surprise that he went to bat quickly for a consituent who felt there was an injustice when they paid for $40 dollars to park for a game that never took place. I wish there were more politicans like him in public office. Try calling some of your "friends" on the council on an issue and good luck with their response time.

Nicola Alverez

Thursday, May 18, 2006 4:22:44 PM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

Hey Adam, where is your brain? The city doesn't have any money nor do they run the MBTA - the MBTA does. For cris sakes know what you are talking about...uneducated write and read this blog. As to your idea, put your name on a ballot and offer that up. I am sure the taxpayers will love that one. I can see it now...."Okay guys, I am going to have to increase your taxes to subsidize Red Sox fans." You kidding me?

Flaherty's idea is common sense.

Paul

Friday, May 19, 2006 8:53:27 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

The people who paid the $90.00 don't live in Boston. C'mon Michael, pay attention to us. Quit trying to invent lame crap to get your name in the paper. When you look deeper into all your pr stuff you see how the Boston City Council is a big nothing.

That pay raise was a disgrace.

What about the voters, Michael?

Next mayor of Boston? NOT MICHAEL FLAHERTY!

Ernie Boch, III

Friday, May 19, 2006 10:25:16 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

are you a Boston voter, Ernie? I am. And so were the people who got stuck with a $90 rain out tab for parking -- West Roxbury folks.

Next Mayor - Michael Flaherty.

Kurt

Sunday, May 21, 2006 11:31:07 AM (Eastern Standard Time, UTC-05:00)

I was like one of those mentioned in the paper that was out $40 for parking and I am from BOSTON thank you very mcuh! Its common sense and I am glad that Flaherty is doing it.

Paul Stevenson

Comments are closed.