ParkMagic or ParkNonsense?

There are 33,000 parking meters on the streets in the city of Chicago. I remember a simpler time, when you pulled up to a meter, whucked in a few quarters to throw time on the clock as needed, and went about your business. You didn't want to come back rushing to feed the meter, so you erred on the side of caution and maybe put in a little extra to make sure you have the time. You finish your business, come back to your car, and while for a second you lament the cents wasted with 12 minutes left on the meter, you consider those pennies better than the amount of a parking ticket, and consider it a charitable gift to whomever pulls their car in during the next 12 minutes.

If you think this "simpler time" is present day, you're sorely mistaken. Welcome to the ParkMagic era.

ParkMagic is an Ireland-based company with a U.S. site in Michigan. Basically the program entails a beeper-looking device that you buy and initially load with $15 or more. As you pull up to a parking meter, you then call this number, punch in your beeper information and the zone of your meter (yes, there are ZONES now, more on that in a minute), and it downloads to your beeper with a countdown instead of the meter. Now, instead of running to the meter to feed it more, you dash to your cellphone to call back up and dial in more money. Supposedly in the future, if this becomes mainstream, you'll be able to receive e-mails of traffic and availability as well as RECEIVE calls from your meter when it's close to expiring.

Some people may see this as a vast improvement, mostly because they don't need quarters anymore. I see it as nothing but a nuisance and digital nonsense.

For starters, the ZONES. I already am loathed at the idea that the city can just decree that just for arriving in the city and wanting to do business and stimulate the economy, you must pay for the privilege of leaving your car. We really are just a few steps away from tolls just to enter the precious city space. Sorry, city, but you're just slabs of pavement and asphalt and hobo urine - so GET OVER YOURSELF and just let me park the damned car. There used to be a STANDARD rate of coinage in a meter in relation to time allowed to park there. Now there are ZONES, from 1 to 6, which dictate how much time a quarter (oh, I'm sorry - 25 electronic cents) will get you. Zone 1 allows five whole minutes, Zone 2 is ten, Zone 3 is fifteen, Zone 4 is twenty, Zone 5 is thirty and Zone 6 allows for an hour.

If technology of today is any indicator, parking at a Zone 1 meter will mean that within 60 seconds, you'll need to be dialing in the number again to go through the menus and wait time due to call volume in order to ensure that your next 5-minute payment goes through before your meter runs out.

Of course, I'm sure that you can pay for more than 5 minutes at a time, but my point stands. Ten seconds to whuck in change, versus four minutes of phone menus to hope that everything works right and your beeper registers your payment.

Here's where a big truckload of nonsense comes into play: everyone is treating this like the city of Chicago is LOSING money somehow on these meters and that the new system will fix everything.

First off, the city starts LOSING money because now a share of the parking meter revenue gets split with ParkMagic. Doesn't anyone know business anymore? The more people you bring in on a deal, the more partners you have to share the profits with. Try watching ONE heist film and then tell me it's a smart idea to bring in some new jackass who wants a cut of the money. He'll probably shoot you and take YOUR cut, too. *shakes fist at ParkMagic* I'm not falling for that one again!!!

Secondly, too much emphasis is being put on cents and minutes and LIES. Take this quote from the ParkMagic CEO: "People pay for one hour. If they come back in an hour and fifteen minutes and get a ticket, they feel bad about it. If they don't get a ticket, the city has just lost 25 percent of an hour [worth of revenue]." Okay, assuming that you're willing to nitpick over the fact that the city loses that fifteen minutes in revenue (eight cents), that needs to be compared to the FREE money that the city gets from overpaying at a meter and leaving before time expires. You can't simply argue that it doesn't count, because someone else will pull into that spot and NOT pay money because time's still on the meter; we're using the same logic of "if that thing happens in this way" like the failure to issue a ticket, and the city hasn't even LOST money because the meter is fed and that's money for the city no matter whose car is parked there.

It's also a foolish idea to base this on the failure to issue tickets, which we ALL know is NOT the case. Even at a rate of two tickets per hour, I have a feeling that this revenue for the city not only pays for the meter agent's wages for the hour, but also counteracts all of those missed-eight-cents meters. I'm also pretty sure that more than two tickets are written per hour by each agent.

Thirdly, doesn't this go against everything that our politicians have been talking about? I may not have the best memory in the world, but wasn't it not too long ago that my favorite nemesis alderman was trying to ban radar detectors because they could be used to warn drivers of speed cameras? Didn't that alderman admit, point blank, that all of those tickets weren't just something that brought in revenue for the city - they were downright PART OF THE BUDGET?

So how is it that the aldermen are fine with this ParkMagic program? They lose money from the meters because the new partner gets a cut, and they're admittedly welcoming in a system that would potentially reduce the number of meter-related parking tickets by a drastic amount. Something just really doesn't seem right here. I mean, it seems completely right if you're a driver in the city of Chicago - which is what's baffling me. Maybe I'm just not used to programs potentially helping actual citizens (I mean, until the lack of ticket money creates a deficit that needs to be made up for by inevitably creating higher taxes).

I can't shake the feeling that this will bite us all in the ass.

Of course, I could be wrong. I don't even drive or own a car...

(The article about ParkMagic)







Read more!

Chicago Traffic: 2nd-Worst in the Nation

I am not a driver.

I just had to get that out of the way, so you know that the rest of this post is going to be only pure facts from the article I read, or pure opinion that should be taken with a grain of salt. Last time I was behind the wheel of a car was 2001, and that was just getting some practice hours in before thinking about going for my driver's license, which I obviously never bothered to get. Of course, that's because I moved here to Chicago, under the impression that I would never need a car here - thanks to the public transportation system.

In retrospect, maybe it wasn't all that horrible of a decision. For all the guff my friends give me about not owning a car or being able to drive, and how crappy the CTA runs here in the city - I can at least rub their noses back in the fact that in comparison, I think the vehicular congestion and waste of resources is a much crappier system to be a part of. Plus, I moved here to Chicago from the city of Los Angeles - so I technically upgraded. While Chicago is #2 or #3 worst in a lot of these categories of horrible driving conditions, at least L.A. stays put at #1, though not by a huge margin.

According to the study results that were done on traffic conditions and congestion and delays and whatnot - every year, the average Chicago motorist loses 46 hours of time stuck in traffic during peak hours. Back in 1995, they only lost 33 hours per year, so you can see that the incline keeps going. Every year, more than an entire average WORKWEEK is lost just because of peak-hour traffic, per driver. The amount of fuel that adds up to, per driver, is 32 gallons. The total cost is $906, just due to traffic alone. When you account for the fact that there are millions of drivers out there, it's a total of over 203 million hours lost and costs over $4 billion annually.

The 203 million hours lost puts Chicago smack dab in 3rd place, with New York losing 384 million hours a year and Los Angeles taking the cake with 491 million hours lost. But the real shame brought to Chicago is that it is #2 in the category of Time Indexes. A Time Index is how to calculate how much time you should prepare in advance to make a trip due to delays. Chicago has a Time Index of 1.47, which means that for every 20-minute drive you take, it's going to really take 29.4 minutes. Only Los Angeles has a higher Time Index, and it's only higher by .03 - meaning it'll take a full 30 minutes for that 20-minute trip in the City of Angels.

Of course, I don't put much stock in the Time Index system, after taking a look at it. I mean, it's a great idea in theory, but it's that base-time calculation that befuddles me. Were these trips timed at 20 minutes based simply on drives taken during non-peak hours? Is that 9pm? Midnight? 3am on a Sunday? There's no way to get a "lab test" or any real scientific control done on a commute, so it's very difficult to predict what your base time for any drive would be, meaning that any calculation using a Time Index is going to be rather fruitless.

Here's something that I thought interesting: judging by the numbers, the study shows that the city of Chicago has over 4.4 million drivers on the road. That's the number they used to multiply the 46 hours and $906 lost annually per driver to get those astronomical numbers for the city itself. So what about the third number that they calculated? If every driver is wasting 32 gallons of gasoline per year, then that means that every year over 142 million gallons of gas are being wasted.

The Exxon Valdez oil spill only lost about 11 million gallons of crude oil. Every year, Chicago is wasting more gasoline than almost 13 Exxon Valdez spills.

And people still give me grief about taking city transportation? I'd rather deal with "slow zones" than this mess. Losing $906 a year, on top of whatever it costs to run and maintain a car and keep it filled with gas, let alone parking in the city? No thanks. $906 could buy more than twelve 30-day CTA passes, so I could pay for a year's worth of transportation with the EXTRA WASTED money that a Chicago driver loses in that year.

Every now and then, with all of the muck and mire that the CTA gets dragged through, there are still things that make me appreciate it just enough to keep following and using it. Aside from the colorful cast of characters you meet on buses and trains, there are a few nice things about using public transportation - even if it means relying on the frequently-unreliable. And there's the financial benefit. Something tells me that buses aren't going to fare anywhere near cars when you consider the traffic and time-loss implications (they're in the same traffic, plus making stops along the way) - but the trains make up for it all, even when you take into consideration all of the "slow zones" that commuters seem bogged down with.

Maybe it really is faster than driving. It's certainly cheaper, for now. But then again, I guess you get what you pay for.

(A version of the article printed in the RedEye)
(A pretty graph of some of these numbers)







Read more!

Radar Ban? - Why Alderman Burke Should Resign Immediately

It's a sunny afternoon, and you're cruising down the avenue. The top's down, you're soaking in the sunlight, and you don't care how fast your convertible is zooming down the street. You're too enraptured by whatever CD you've got in your sound system to notice a small sign as you're passing by. Suddenly, your Cobra Electronics device you just installed starts flashing and verbally warns you of a speed/redlight camera at the upcoming intersection. You look at the spedometer, and tone it down to a legal speed. You come to a full and complete stop at the red light. It turns green, and you accelerate once more as you drive on to your significant other's pad for some lovin'. All's well that ends well - no ticket for you, and no life-threatening crashes or injuries all around. What could be wrong with this picture?

Alderman Burke wants that device banned.

Because he'd rather have you endangering your safety and the safety of others than risk missing out on an opportunity to ticket you $90.

There's no doubt about it - Burke claims that the cameras used to ticket redlight-runners and speed-demons are just a way for the city to profit. "That is why all these cameras are being installed. ... The reality is that people blow through these intersections and they are going to be caught and they are going to be fined. It has become a big revenue source, absolutely," said Burke. In fact, he went on to say that these tickets are "budgeted in our annual appropriation ordinance" - that the government is DEPENDING on people to disobey the law.

"I don't think the [city's] goal is to allow the motorist to subvert the system that we are spending so much money on," Burke said. I don't know how much it takes to install the cameras or the costs to keep them monitoring and cranking out the tickets, but last year the cameras profited the city $19.8 million in total. At $90 a ticket, that's 220,000 tickets for the year, which is an average of 603 each day (or 25 per hour). Every hour, those cameras are netting $2,250 for the city - and they're complaining about how much they're SPENDING on the cameras?

As for "subverting the system" - is Burke suggesting that a system being utilized to alert drivers of an upcoming camera and possible ticket is the crime? That people being warned of getting caught for reckless driving is what's bringing down the cashflow system of the red-light cameras??

Hey Alderman Douchebag! Every single ticketing camera has a SIGN to WARN drivers!

The only difference between the current system and the Cobra Electronics device is that one is a small sign that many fail to notice before it's too late (if at all), and one is a few more bells and whistles going off to further alert the driver to slow down and play it safe or the camera will be issuing a ticket. Both do the exact same thing - warn the driver to slow down and obey the rules, because a camera is watching and will automatically ticket you. The only difference is the degree.

And if banning a product because it does a BETTER job than the GOVERNMENT of keeping drivers SAFE makes any sense to you - apparently you could be a douchebag alderman for the Chicago City Council like Burke.

VOTE AARON SAMUELS FOR ALDERMAN IN 2011! A VOTE FOR SANITY! Read more!

"Congestion Fee" - Why Alderman Burke Should Resign Immediately

In the Chicago Tribune (and RedEye):

Should motorists pay a toll for the privilege of driving in Chicago's central business district?

Ald. Edward Burke (14th) believes it's a good time to raise the question.

Burke on Wednesday introduced a resolution calling for a City Council hearing on the feasibility of levying a "congestion fee" on drivers who set tire downtown.

"Can it reduce pollution? Can it reduce traffic? Can it raise a revenue stream to help out the beleaguered CTA?" Burke asked. "It's certainly a very complicated issue and one that should not be rushed into. But I thought that as long as London is doing it, as long as New York is [proposing] it, perhaps it is an idea that Chicago ought to consider."

How much would be charged, how would tolls be collected and how much money might be generated for the cash-strapped CTA are the types of information the alderman hopes to gather by listening to experts at the hearing.

Mayor Richard Daley said he has an open mind on the congestion-fee concept. But he also has reservations.

With their narrow streets and absence of alleys, London and New York are "completely different" from Chicago, he said.

"Are you going to put [the fee] on all the aldermen who drive every day?" Daley asked. "What about all the trucks coming downtown? What do you do with them?"

"Let's not rush to that and scare everybody off," the mayor declared. "We are trying to keep businesses here and ... move businesses into the city."

There's never a good time to raise a question that foolish.

What Burke is proposing is seemingly the most backwards proposal that my rage-filled brain can remember ever having heard. I don't even know where to begin ranting about this atrocity – other than publicly calling for the Alderman's immediate removal from office on the grounds of sheer stupidity alone.

"Can it reduce pollution? Can it reduce traffic?" It wouldn't take the mental capacity of an 8-year-old to realize that tolls get paid at tollbooths, tollbooths cause lines of cars waiting to pay the toll, and huge lines of cars are the definition of 'increased traffic' that is all the while creating 'increased pollution' by having to linger and create exhaust in concentrated areas. "Can it raise a revenue stream to help out the beleaguered CTA?" It takes a twisted mind to propose charging people to NOT use your product. The idea of charging people money for driving instead of using the CTA just to raise money for the CTA is just absurd. I hope that Burke never works for Microsoft, or we all might have to pay a fee to use a non-Windows operating system!

As if city motorists don't have it hard enough already with congestion that kills fuel efficiency and loads of time as well as the exorbitant fees to park in any parking garage (unless you want to risk meters and outrageous parking tickets) – now this elected official is suggesting we charge them to have to suffer through all this?

This complicated issue that "should not be rushed into" is one that should not have been rushed going from the alderman's brain to his mouth, because it went straight from his mouth to our ears.

This is the most ridiculous idea I can recall coming from the city aldermen since the insane foie gras ban that passed unanimously (meaning that not a single alderman saw how foolish and wrong it was and they should all be ashamed). This "congestion fee" is foolish enough to warrant kicking Burke out of office immediately. The city needs more aldermen who are smart enough to not only come up with some good ideas for a change, but also know when to keep their mouths shut to avoid the bad ideas from ever getting out.


Just remember, folks. AARON SAMUELS FOR CITY COUNCIL ALDERMAN IN 2011! Time for someone with a shred of sanity and logic to help rule the city! Read more!