A NEW TWIST FOR "DOWNTOWN" BROWNSVILLE PARKING

Special to El Rrun_Rrun

Ever since time immemorial, parking downtown has always been a problem, and some "fixes" have just created more without reaching any solution. 

Remember the sleight-of-hand when the city commission held a public hearing on whether to double the parking rates downtown?

The "hearing" was dutifully held and was run by then-Director of Government and Community Affairs Ramiro Gonzalez at a meeting space in Market Square and speaker after speaker spoke out against the increase. And what did the city do? Exactly the opposite of the majority of the speakers: they doubled the rates.

During Tuesday's meeting on the first reading of a new downtown parking ordinance, Section 98-266, the city administration has come up with a new scheme for downtown parking that incredibly, manages to stretch the downtown into an area that includes the downtown Historic District all the way to Palm  Boulevard, north to I-69, the Mitte Cultural District, Linear Park, up to International Boulevard and includes all the international bridges.

If you think that parking gerrymandering is weird, the ordinance also includes the establishment of a motor vehicle parking system fund to be maintained in a separate bank account from all other city funds and used for operation and maintenance cost of the downtown area. Any surplus revenues from this fund will be used  – at the city manager's discretion or a designee, and city commission's approval when required by law – to include improvement projects such as "events" and new equipment.

These one-time capital projects will be prioritized for downtown improvement projects and it will be up to the city manager and/or designee to identify projects that will contribute to further downtown revitalization. 

Now, the last time we looked there weren't any parking meters on Palm Boulevard, past former mayors Trey Mendez and Tony Martinez businesses near Sharp Elementary, Linear Park or the Mitte Cultural District, although the new downtown demarcation will cover them all for on-time capital projects and "events."

So who – apart from the motorists paying for parking – will pay into this "special fund?"

The city manager or designee will issue parking permits or placards for a $60 monthly fee for downtown business owners or renters as well as downtown residents. The permits and placards will only be valid in city lots.

Each business owner or renter may apply for a maximum of three permits (a total of $180 a month, $2,160 a year for the three) and business owners and renters must show proof of current ownership or lease of a downtown business or residence and unutilized spaces may be revoked at the discretion of the city manager or designee. (Section 98-378.)

And since the new parking ordinance scheme covers such a large area including a large section with no parking meters or city parking lots, it is clear that those buying the monthly $60 permits will foot the bill for any one-time capital projects and "events" across that wide stretch of the territory covered in the new ordinance.

There are scant city parking spaces that the city can use to issue the permits and placards, so they will probably be in high demand and ona first-come, first- served basis with predictable results for insiders. If not, then the business or residents will pay the $1 per hour fee to the automated parking station. A 10-hour day will result in a $60 weekly parking fee for them, or $240 a month, as some have pointed out. 

For arguments sake, let's say that Rose Gowen wants to have a cyclobia "event" that starts at Seventh and Park – which by the way, uses the linear park parking spaces as its own – and the event encompasses the Linear Park and ends near the Prax Orive pocket park next to the former mayors' businesses. Will the city manager – at her discretion – make a fund outlay from the money paid by real downtown business owners and residents to subsidize the "event?"

And the genius behind this scheme, one Roberto Baez, Change & Strategy Manager, put some teeth into an accompanying ordinance. You remember Mr. Baez. He tried to remove the municipal court employees and place them under the city manager's office and was quickly rebuffed by then-Judge Ben Neece who threatened to get a court injunction in the obvious usurpation of the executive over the judicial power.

Under the other ordinance titled 2023‐736, Section 98.2, 98.3, and 98.4, it states:

"It shall be the duty of the police department to enforce this chapter, all other city street and traffic laws and all the state traffic laws applicable to traffic in the city and no person shall willfully fail or refuse to comply with any lawful order or direction of any police officer invested by law with authority to direct, control or regulate traffic. Any person who shall violate any of the sections of this chapter shall be guilty of a misdemeanor and, upon conviction, shall be fined not to exceed $500.00."

Who thinks of this stuff?