05/01/2009 - Parking restrictions not eased at City Hall

Parking restrictions not eased at City Hall
BY BRYAN LA PLACA
Executive Editor
HOBOKEN – It won’t get any easier to fight City Hall in the near future. At its Wednesday, April 15 meeting, the City Council rejected an amendment that would have allowed for more convenient parking around the building.

Public Safety Director William Bergin said that the metered parking spaces around City Hall are not intended as a revenue source. Parking should be available around City Hall for citizens to be able to park conveniently to do their business at City Hall, he said.

But the majority of the council rejected the ordinance amendment that would have “removed restricted parking areas around city hall, increased parking for the general public, and made certain other improvements,” according to the language of the amendment.

The time limit for parking in metered spots would have been increased from a half-hour to 45 minutes under this amendment. The proposed rules would have only applied between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., after which parking around the City Hall building would have been restricted to those with resident parking permits only.

Bergin argued for the current parking restrictions to be eased, saying that city employees and others who have business in City Hall should have a place to park “in safety.” He reasoned that a system could be set up where those who attend council meetings at night could have their parking validated so that they wouldn’t have to essentially pay to attend public council meetings.
“I feel the change will be greatly appreciated by all of your constituents,” said Bergin.

Councilwoman At-Large and Council Vice President Terry LaBruno asked if business owners on the west side of Bloomfield Bloomfield Avenue were notified of the proposed parking rules change, and suggested maintaining a restricted parking zone on the west side of Bloomfield Avenue.

City Attorney Steve Kleinman told that council that incorporating LaBruno’s suggestions would change the language of the ordinance amendment substantially enough that the proposed rule change would have to be re-advertised and re-introduced -- basically going back to square-one with the parking rule change proposal.

Second ward Councilwoman Elizabeth Mason said she did not want to change the parking law without first notifying local business owners.

Discussion went back and forth on the best way to notify business owners of the proposed parking rule change.

Fourth Ward Councilwoman Dawn Zimmer said she favored putting the amendment aside for now and notifying business owners in the interim that parking rule changes that would affect them were being considered by the Council.

Councilman At-large Peter Cammarano said he was ready to vote against the ordinance amendment whether it came up for a council vote during that April 15 meeting or a subsequent one.

First Ward Councilwoman Theresa Castellano suggested that the council vote on the ordinance amendment as it was, and then worry about making changes to it if it did, in fact, pass.

When the ordinance came up for a vote, only Councilwoman LaBruno voted in the affirmative, and the ordinance amendment failed with a vote of 1-6-2. Third Ward Councilman Michael Russo and Sixth Ward Councilman Nino Giacchi did not attend the meeting.