The Cambridge City Council on Monday moved forward with an increase in the annual fee for a resident parking pass, voting to ask the city manager to assess the move. The specific request is to change the fee from $25 to $75 for most residents. Councillors say a new fee structure, which provides a discount for people who proclaim financial hardship and removes the exemption for seniors, is necessary in order to better cover the cost of administering the program. Seven councillors voted for the change, with councillors E. Denise Simmons and Timothy Flaherty voting against.
The policy order that passed was an updated version of the one that first appeared on the council’s agenda during its February 9th meeting. The most significant change to the order is its description of who is eligible for the discounted fee from “for residents who live in affordable housing, are enrolled in a program such as SNAP or are low income,” to “for whom the $75 presents a hardship.”
The version of the policy order that passed also eliminated an exemption for those 65 years and older. The removal of the senior exemption was a cause of public outcry, with at least one person advocating against it during the public comment period of each city council meeting since its introduction.
Councillors have said that the tenor of conversations they’ve had privately with seniors has been much different, though.
“Every single person I’ve talked to, including many, many seniors, they totally love the exemption,” said Councillor Patty Nolan. “And when I explain that city staff has said it costs $75, they say, ‘Well, I love it, but I should be paying the $75.”
Simmons disagreed with removing the senior exemption. She referenced the averse public reaction in her comments. “If there’s seniors that think this is the greatest thing since sliced bread and jam, please bring them to the council to speak to us, because I want to hear from them,” Simmons said.
Simmons also said she’d prefer the higher fee to be an opt-in rather than an opt-out system where those who wanted to pay a higher cost could.
“The default should not be to strip away a protection and force people to add it back,” Simmons said. “I cannot think of anything more demeaning than asking people that are already struggling ‘Please prove to me that you’re worthy.”
Councillor Marc McGovern clarified that while low-income residents are often required to prove their level of income to acquire certain benefits, in this case, the city would take residents’ word for it.
“When you are a lower income person or you’re someone who is getting some kind of subsidy from somebody, you do have to jump through a lot of hoops … It is a bureaucracy, and it is degrading at times,” McGovern said. “But, just to be clear, this is just asking you to check a box.”
He also defended the decision to remove the senior exemption.
“You have seniors in this community who could afford the $75 or more who get an exemption. But, if you’re a 30-year-old single mother living in Newtowne Court you have to pay?” McGovern said. “I’m not sure how that makes sense.”
McGovern’s rationale received some support during public comment. “Ability to pay should be the sole decider regardless of age, which this policy order does consider,” said Cambridge resident Charles Franklin. He also said he thought that raising the fee to cover the cost of the program was “good governance.”
Residents have also expressed their astonishment over the cost per vehicle to administer the program, which prompted the city manager’s office to recommend a price increase two years ago.
“Just how inept an administrator can run a department which spends more than $75 to deliver this to me,” said Gary Mello during the March 2 meeting, holding up his parking pass. “I’ll answer that. The same inept administrator who sends me not just one, not just two, but three notices to renew my sticker instead of just putting the damn thing in an envelope, saving the city and me huge time and money.”
During Monday’s meeting, Mello compared the lines at city hall annex on March 31 as people pick up parking passes to the Transportation Security Administration lines at airports.
“The annual idiocy, particularly tomorrow, March 31st, is just as bad [as TSA], as victims circle the lobby,” said Mello. “Frequently waiting over an hour and paying for, well, nothing.”
Councillor Cathie Zusy clarified that the costs attributed to the program weren’t just from printing stickers, but also covered staff time and the cost of the information system that manages parking in the city.
“This analysis led us to the $75 cost. Since 2024, costs have escalated,” Zusy said. “If we were to rerun the analysis with updated costs, it will have grown since then.”
While the policy order received a solid 7-2 majority, its passage was almost delayed by a motion from Councillor Flaherty to move the bill to the transportation committee for further discussion and public input. But other councillors were eager to have this item taken off the agenda, noting that technically the policy order requested the city manager report back first about the possibility of such a change. If the city manager approves, the final change would have to make its way to the council again.
After deliberating a proposed fee change in private and during session for two years, and having a proposal in front of them for the majority of the term thus far, they felt it was time to start moving forward.
“We can adopt this policy order tonight, have a conversation in the transportation committee, have that full discussion,” said Councillor Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler. “But move this off the agenda.”
A stronger
Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.
We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.
Please consider a recurring contribution.