- November 17, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
A motion on paid parking that was about as clear as beach fog when the Flagler Beach City Commission passed it April 30 wasn’t much clearer on the second go-round at a meeting May 14, as commissioners left hazy the details of how the city will move forward.
But Commissioner Steve Settle, who’d made the motion at the previous meeting, made this much clear: He had intended that his motion direct staff to implement a paid parking plan. He did not say what kind.
City Manager Bruce Campbell said in an interview after the meeting that whatever the city moves forward with will likely be a hybrid of several options proposed by the city’s ad-hoc parking committee: Option 2, which would involve enforcing time limits but not adding paid parking; Option 3, which would require payment for parking in city lots but not for on-street parking; and Option 4, which would require payment for street parking and city lot parking 36 weeks each year, with passes for city residents. The committee itself had favored Option 4.
For now, Campbell said, “We’re looking at adding signage, we’re getting land together to open up some of the new lots, we’re looking at tearing down buildings, at optimizing the lots that we have, at where we could enforce and expand two-hour parking, and we’re looking at paid parking.”
‘TURNS OUT IT WAS VAGUE’
At the May 14 meeting, Settle made a new motion — this time requesting a straw poll on beach parking — in part because he wanted citizen input, he said, and in part because he’d realized his motion on beach parking from the last meeting “doesn’t seem to be understood by anyone in Flagler Beach.”
“I just did a terrible job making a motion two weeks ago. I did a very bad job,” he said. “I tried to make a motion that I thought was the best balance. … It turns out it was vague.”
Settle re-read the motion from the previous meeting:
“That we accept the findings of the ad-hoc (parking) committee in terms of all the actions taken they asked to be looked at, and we direct staff to look at each of those items that the task force suggests we look at. I am stopping short of the paid parking. I would like to make the motion that staff look at the implementation of paid parking and how it would work, and come back to us not jumping in with both feet at once, but in terms of implementing it in slow steps and dealing with the costs and how it would work. And that would deal with working with the residents, and working with business owners to try to iron out the differences.”
After the previous meeting, Campbell hadn’t been entirely sure what he was being tasked with. “I’ll be honest, I’m a little bit confused myself as to what staff’s being asked to do,” he said at the May 14 meeting. “As I interpret (the motion), it was some combination between the ad hoc committee’s recommendations two, three and four.”
STRAW POLL?
Commissioner Kim Carney, one of the four commissioners who voted for Settle’s motion — just Commissioner Jane Mealy voted against — said she thought the motion was clear.
“I seconded it, and I wasn’t unclear at all,” Carney said.
She didn’t see the need for a straw poll, which, as Settle had recommended it, would come out on the ballot this coming March and therefore be confined to a limited number of words.
“I don’t think that writing something in 100 words or 120 words or however many words we get … I don’t think we can cover this,” she said. “I believe that I’m also searching for balance, and I don’t think we can get that though a vote.”
Carney said she considered the parking issue a budgetary matter, not the sort of issue, she said, the commission should be consulting the people on.
She also thought residents favored paid parking. “I believe the consensus is that people want us to look at and very seriously consider the recommendations made by the committee,” she said.
Commissioner Jane Mealy also opposed the idea of a straw poll.
“We get elected and paid the big bucks to make the big decisions, and I think it’s up to us based on the knowledge that we have,” she said.
Commissioner Joy McGrew said there probably wasn’t time for the city to put together more information, come up with a plan, and get the information out to residents before the upcoming election.
And, she said, “Personally, I think we missed the mark in our study. Who are we trying to get to help share the cost of the maintenance, the upkeep and the services of the beach? And I said it last time and I guess I’ll say it again: It was never meant to target the downtown business area. ... In my mind, yes it’s everyone’s beach — make sure that goes in the paper, it’s everyone’s beach — but the services rely on our shoulders.”
Mayor Linda Provencher, who’d been a member of the parking committee, which sunsetted at the last meeting, also opposed a straw poll.
“Fire truck: ‘No, they don’t need to vote, we make the decisions.’ Golf course: Do we vote on that? No. But now all the sudden, we’re going to try to put in 75 words, a document that took us two years,” she said. Provencher said she thought the commission had options other than paid parking.
“There are lots that we have in the city that are not complete,” she said. “If we have such a parking problem, why are those lots not finished? Have we gone to the county to talk to them about additional moneys? No. I’ve spoken to several commissioners. I think the county realizes that, yes, if we’re going to bring people here, and they’re going to advertise this beach, that yes, we do need more than the $72,000 we get for lifeguards.
But do we know the repercussions if we institute paid parking? Will they then not give us any money for anything ever again? There’s a lot of questions that need to be answered before you could even think about us voting on it, let alone putting it out there: ‘Do you want paid parking, yes or no.’”
Commissioner Marshal Shupe said there was more the city could do before implementing paid parking. “To me, there’s a lot of things we can step up to the plate with, begin with, before we get into the paid parking,” including looking for other revenue sources.
‘OTHER ALTERNATIVES’
Matt Dunn, the county’s tourism chief, said in the meeting’s public comment period that he understood that the inquiry into paid parking had “started as a beach maintenance budget deficit issue, not a parking issue,” and that visitor spending lowers residents’ taxes.
“There are other alternatives for you to look at,” he said. “The county administrator and your city manager have been discussing the problem. ... Currently you are receiving $72,500 from the county toward your ocean rescue program. In the past you have received over $100,000. Only $72,500 was asked for this fiscal year. They are absolutely amenable to increase that number. … So I want to stress over and over and over again, and repeatedly, repeatedly repeatedly, that you have other alternatives, than to implement paid parking. We’re very, very concerned. This economy in Flagler Beach exists off of visitors: I’m confident in making that bold statement. And we’re very concerned at how this would send folks away.”
Dunn said that tourism tax money goes into three funds: Capital Projects, Promotions, and Beach Restoration — and that the money is available for the city to use for beach projects and maintenance.
Settle replied that he had been “told conclusively that every cent in the beach fund goes to pay the Army Corps of Engineers for the (beach restoration) study.” He asked Dunn if that had changed, and Dunn said the money had been spent in different ways, including in Flagler Beach — drawing incredulity from Settle.
“Are you telling me from now on it’s going to be open for any other project we need in Flagler Beach?” Settle said.
Dunn said he believed beach maintenance would qualify.
“Well, you know, that’s really good news,” Settle said, “because from now on we’ll feel free to put in an application for everything,” Settle continued.
“That’s what it’s there for,” Dunn said, “and that’s what you should lobby the county commissioners for.”
Carney wasn’t convinced.
“Do you have any data that says that paid parking in any city will destroy the image of the city?” she asked Dunn. “They all have them, Matt. Every single oceanside city has paid parking now. It doesn’t destroy the city. It does not destroy the image of the city. The quaint city feeling that we all have? It’s not based on parking, paid parking or not. ...It doesn’t stop you from living your life because you’ve got to put $5 in the meter. I just — I don’t see how our city is going to fall apart because we have paid parking.”
“My point is you have other alternatives,” Dunn replied. “I’m very willing to discuss those with you at length, hoping that your city manager and the county administrator can continue their conversation.”
County Administrator Craig Coffey said in an interview after the meeting that he has arranged discussions with Campbell, and that the county is willing to aid the city with beach issues and has done so in the past.
He called Provencher’s fear of a county backlash against paid parking “speculative,” but said paid parking could have unintended consequences. For instance, “If they do put paid parking down there, it could actually drive people to our beachfront parks,” he said. “We give them a little more than half of the lifeguard money. But if we got a bunch of beachgoers in our parks, we might have to shift those resources … if we’re going to take on that responsibility.”
The county is already “feeling the crunch” of increased beach activity, adding parking lots at Mala Compra and Varn Park, he said. The county’s lots offer free parking.
Several people spoke during the meeting’s public comment period, two to oppose paid parking, others to suggest caution if the city opts to implement it.
Settle asked to make a motion to cancel his “vague” motion from the previous meeting.
He wanted to then put forth a motion that would ask staff to “look at (the ad hoc parking committee report) as a package, and begin moving forward, answering all questions related to all of it, implementation of paid parking, how that would work, because, specifically, let’s not go and start spending money on other things until we’re ready to raise the revenues. That’s what I’m trying to get at here.”
But other commissioners didn’t want to reconsider the previous parking motion: Of the five, only Settle and McGrew voted to do so.
Settle said he’d put off his motion for a straw poll, and suggested Campbell make a presentation about what he’s working on at the next meeting. “ I don’t want to lead him down the wrong path,” Settle said. “If he needs some more clarification, maybe we can do it as an agenda item with (Campbell’s) presentation.”
