Auctioning the property would be far better than reducing the size of the police force, the mayor says. "That's why I want the council to think outside the box and follow the lead of other major cities like Chicago," he said this week.
That lead could be messy. Caught in a soaking rain earlier this month, a steamed Carolyn Calhoun pumped eight quarters into a parking meter near Chicago's downtown Central Hearing Facility. The fistful of change bought her just enough time to walk inside and pay $200 in parking tickets -- for expired meters, she muttered through clenched teeth.
"That's the city -- just nickel-and-diming us to death," said Calhoun, who is 51, is on disability and owns a car that won't start on cold Chicago mornings.
Nearby, Rohan Dhimar, 23, had choice words for city officials who had approved the lease plan. He got nailed with a $50 ticket for an expired meter while interviewing for a job downtown.
"They're . . . idiots. All this money and the city is still falling apart. Have you seen the number of potholes in Chicago?" he said.
Anger crested in recent months when meters across Chicago starting jamming and cars were being blanketed with tickets. Because of the higher rates, the meters were filling faster than they could be emptied by the servicing contractor, LAZ Parking.
Not only are more parking tickets being dished out, but the city also started booting cars for having two outstanding tickets, according to the "Parking Ticket Geek," a Chicago blogger who has been chronicling the meter outrage. He spoke on condition of anonymity for fear of retribution from city officials.
"It's really turned mean in the last four months. . . . It's all about revenue," the Geek said.
Chicago politicians still remember that a generation ago, a voter revolt over lousy snow removal led to a mayor's downfall. When the parking backlash hit, aldermen worked fast to cover their political backsides. They blamed Daley for ramming the lease agreement through, saying they had just two days to deliberate.
"They were selling it as 'This is the only way to plug the budget gap created over the last year,' " said Alderman Scott Waguespack, one of only five officials to vote against the proposal. "The mayor's office refused to release any financial documents or analysis, and here you're giving it away for 75 years."
