Re: Guest Comment: “Parking Meter Fiasco” (By downtown Chico business owners)
Thank you for “Parking Meter Fiasco.” The old parking meter system was troublesome, but this new system is terrible. I shop in Chico every Thursday—Tom Foolery and Bird in Hand are two favorite stores—but I shop at many more, including those with western wear and hardware. My downtown usage was limited due to the previous parking regulations and now it has reached a point where I cannot bring myself to endure it. If the city were to return to the old system I will return to shopping downtown.
I wonder how many of the parking kiosk complainers have even used it, or did they just look at it and get so mad they decided to never shop downtown again. People are so extreme these days.
In the time it takes to read this letter twice you can download the app (Passport Parking), enter in your basic contact info, license plate and nickname for each vehicle, and a credit card. Then, through the app, purchase a Chico Card, I did $25. There is no 35 cent service fee for this purchase and it will auto-purchase another $25 when it runs out.
Paying for parking is a breeze, it saves the last used parking zones and vehicles. In four clicks on your phone you’re ready to slide the scale for your desired parking time. You’ll get a notification when your time is running short for an easy add if needed. No more storing or running out of quarters in the car. No more overpaying to make sure you don’t get a ticket. No more running back to the car to drop in more quarters. It really is more functional and couldn’t be easier. Try it before flashing extreme mode.
The Masonic Lodge was full! Many folks who live in the Vina Subbasin area came to the Vina Groundwater Sustainability Agency (GSA) fee workshop, including ranchers, farmers, domestic well-users and Chico residents dependent on Cal Water. We came to ask questions about the fee structure being imposed on property owners by the Vina GSA.
Presenters for Butte County were well-versed in water issues, doing their best to answer a variety of questions from the audience. It was fairly obvious from folks who spoke, that there was plenty of concern and no positive feelings about this decision being made for all of us by a small number of people.
At some point, one county representative told us that a portion of the fee is included because “… we need to pay for potential lawsuits.” She quietly added, “and there is a lawsuit.” No one reacted that I could see. Maybe I’m the only one who heard it.
OK. So, let me get this straight. The people who will be charged this fee and who seem overwhelmingly against it are very likely to agree with the lawsuit. So those of us who support or would support the lawsuit are actually paying for the cost to fight against it.
It is very easy to find information on who filed the lawsuit. AquAlliance, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance and California Water Impact Network seem to be working in our best interests around our dwindling groundwater.
I prefer to contribute to the lawsuit and not the lawyers for the county who will fight against it.