These pages have historically been critical of DOTS, to say the least. A front-page April Fools’ edition article that painted Director David Allen as a villain, “laugh[ing] maniacally from the peak of a mountain made of gold dubloons” sums up the general characterization of the department as a greedy, money-grubbing entity with a reckless disregard for students. Yet, in the interest of credit where it’s due, the department’s The Future of Parking campaign is actually a pretty good idea.
The Department of Transportation Services is putting forth a new cheaper, greener system called Campus License Plate Recognition, effective this fall for students and soon after for faculty and staff. Instead of receiving a hanging permit, students will have their cars’ license plates scanned by DOTS enforcement workers with cameras mounted on their vehicles. The futuristic technology, according to Allen, will save the department money and stop the yearly flow of the plastic permits into landfills.
DOTS has obviously thought this one through — allowing for two cars to be registered per permit makes it easier for students who have to deal with sudden car breakdowns, and the money saved by the department is reportedly what kept the cost of a permit for next school year from increasing. However, there are still a few areas to improve.
First of all, despite the claim that parking rates remaining the same this school year is a win for students, when a business saves $60,000 and doesn’t pass a penny of savings on to the consumer, it’s always a hard pill to swallow. Though DOTS is surely working on other initiatives this year, it would have been nice for students to see even a token amount of those savings.
Beyond that, the new system theoretically will close the window on the time-honored tradition of the underhanded and technically illegal sharing of parking passes among students. Especially during the summer, students who plan to spend a few months away often pass their hanging permits on to friends, especially those who commute to the campus for summer jobs and don’t want to spend $15 a day, $40 for a pack of 10 daily passes or $107 for a commuter pass ($206 if the student lives on campus), just so they can come here to work or attend class. Now that it seems this loophole has been fixed, DOTS should look for a more affordable way for non-permit-holding students to park on the campus without paying an arm and a leg.
The common thread to complaints about on-campus parking is, has been and always will be the expense. In the fall, resident students will have to shell out $419 to park for the semester. Students will remain disgruntled at exorbitant ticket fees. And perhaps there will be more Allen vignettes on this page. The switch to The Future of Parking is, overall, positive. But what it doesn’t do, and what DOTS has never done, is really connect to students. In the end, the campaign works for the department and for the university’s carbon footprint. But students should feel like they’re getting something out of it, too.
