It’s easier to fly to Ocean Grove instead of driving and parking. Blogfinger carton with artist Sue Gioulis.
Below is what OG sounded like on July 27, 2010 when Neptune looked at metered parking. Grovers were angry then also:
“Another Grover, Jan Sotnikoff, said, “We’re not hysterical people, we just don’t think parking meters are a good idea.”
By Charles Layton. Blogfinger editor then. We started Blogfinger in 2009.
MONDAY NIGHT — The debate on parking meters took a new turn tonight, as Township Committee members raised the possibility of a township-wide referendum.
In the workshop portion of the Committee’s meeting, where new ideas are often discussed, Committeeman James Manning proposed a referendum as a way to get a wider sampling of public opinion on the controversial subject.
He suggested that the proposal for parking meters be expanded to include other parts of Neptune besides Ocean Grove, and that it then be placed on the November ballot for a vote. He said the Committee would have to pass a resolution at its next meeting – two weeks from tonight – in order for it to appear on the ballot.
Committeeman Randy Bishop and Mayor Mary Beth Jahn both seemed open to the idea. Jahn said a referendum “would give a lot of people a voice,” and Bishop said he had been hearing lately from people outside Ocean Grove “who are getting interested” because parking meters near the OG boardwalk and in the business district might relieve some of the need for higher property taxes throughout the township.
Richard Cuttrell, the municipal clerk, told the committee that a referendum would have to be non-binding, and that it would have to be worded very specifically.
Up until now, the parking meter idea has been vague as to details. It was first proposed in June by the township’s director of public works, Wayne Rode, as a way to ease Neptune’s budget crunch. It was a rather tentative proposal at the time, but the Committee instructed Rode to do further research and report back in greater detail. His more detailed report has just now been completed, and the mayor ordered that it be posted online on Tuesday, so Committee members and citizens alike can have access.
Expressions of public opposition to metered parking have been rising in Ocean Grove ever since Rode first proposed it. Some of the opposition has been rude and personal, with people accosting Committee members on the streets or harassing them with late-night phone calls. Ironically, most of the rudest abuse has fallen on Jahn, although she alone on the committee has expressed unconditional opposition to meters from the start. But lately Bishop has also received a share of abuse. “I don’t walk on Main Avenue now,” Bishop said, “because I’m sick and tired of having people say ‘How dare you put a parking meter in front of my home.’ ”
During the public comment portion of tonight’s meeting, a parade of Grovers went to the microphone to complain that a Neptune-wide referendum would be unfair to Ocean Grove, because the meters wouldn’t affect very many residents outside the Grove. Furthermore, Susan Taylor said, many Ocean Grove taxpayers don’t vote in Neptune because their primary residence is elsewhere. Others noted that Ocean Grove is unique in that its homes are so close together with very little off-street parking.
“If we were to do it,” Bishop suggested, “Ocean Grove residents would have to be given a sticker or something” to exempt them. “I would never conceive of making the people of Ocean Grove feed a meter.”
Manning conceded that exemptions for Ocean Grove residents “might be an option.” However, as Bishop noted, exempting residents would reduce the revenues from the meters.
Quite a few residents spoke in opposition to meters under any circumstances. Fran Paladino reported to the Committee that members of the Ocean Grove Home Owners Association had gone on record in opposition to parking meters “no matter if you gold plate them.” Carol White complained that even if no meters were placed in front of homes Ocean Grove residents would end up having to park at meters, because visitors would take up the free spaces on the streets in front of their homes.
Toward the end of the meeting Susan Taylor of Ocean Grove apologized to the Committee for the abuse some of its members have taken. “I’m very distressed to hear that people in our community are behaving like that,” she said. She suggested that if Committee members would identify those who had behaved rudely, “maybe we could talk to them.”
Another Grover, Jan Sotnikoff, said, “We’re not hysterical people, we just don’t think parking meters are a good idea.”
The Committee took no immediate action on Manning’s proposal for a non-binding referendum. “I’d like to see the wording first,” Bishop said. The Committee left it at that, for now.
“Flying to Rio”. The Nighthawks from their album Cheek to Cheek.
Charles Ditto the South Bronx.
Grovers are a spoiled lot, NO alternate side parking.
ken
For perspective, though, if you want to experience REAL parking hassles, try living in South Philadephia for a while.
Parking in Ocean Grove on summer weekends has been a hassle for the 20 plus years I have been here. I do not see the absence of parking meters easing things any.
Sue, as is stated in another article, painting spaces causes us to lose parking spaces, not gain them, as the painted space is larger than the average car, and we have no enforcement mechanism for them.
Some thoughts…
1. It would help immensely if the town would have lines painted to designate spaces which would free up dozens more I’m sure! (would be glad to help!)
2. The bulk of the congestion is only about 2 months of the year which doesn’t seem worth it when fooling with meters could keep folks from enjoying even day trips to town, especially since our beachfront and shops are within a few blocks from one another.
3. In most of the surrounding towns the year round residents don’t need to use the beachfront parking, whereas Ocean Grovers are often carting groceries clear across town (or double parking while unloading by their home) because visitors have filled the side streets as well.
Don’t get me wrong, as a year round renter I don’t mind some of the parking inconveniences during the summer, and the it’s wonderful that the community has so much to offer, but I sure would appreciate those parallel parking spacers!
Once again, Fat Al is on target and says it all so succinctly.
Um,Jerry, allow me to point out out your non-logic yet again. I said a referendum on parking meters would be an interesting idea so we could let the people speak. That doesn’t mean I favor parking meters. I don’t, and I’ve said that repeatedly, but you seem to not want to hear that come out of my mouth or off my keyboard.
Just another note on the “referendum” concept. As all involved well know, there are many second home owners in Ocean Grove, and those include many of the people who will be most directly impacted by the unthoughtful installation of parking meters. Many of those second home owners do not vote in Neptune because it is not their primary residence.
They do, however, pay an enormous amount in property taxes. Again, these second homeowners who will have no ability to vote in this “referendum” but are heavily taxed without being represented. The role of elected officials is to look out for what is best for their community, and all of their constituents, and not simply put up what would essentially be a (I don’t want to say “rigged” but) preordained result because many of those impacted directly and who pay heavy taxes in the affected area will be unrepresented.
The referendum idea is a ploy. The political and community leaders need to step up and stand up for what’s right and not simply punt to the majority in Neptune who couldn’t care less what happens in Ocean Grove except to the extent it is throwing off money to the rest of the Township.
FROM TRISH MARTIN OF OCEAN GROVE:
“Playing Devil’s Advocate here…This sounds fascinating…but I wonder how the town of Old Pasadena is laid out re private residences. Are there private homes on the same street as the business district? Were they experiencing an overall shortage of parking throughout the entire town as OG now does? It seems to me that when the metered spaces are taken, or before even considering occupying a metered spot, customers/visitors/employees will turn to the free spaces in front of private residences near and along the business district. Thus bringing us around in a circle right back to a shortage of parking for residents who would not benefit directly from improvements and services generated by the parking meter revenue because there are no meters in front of their homes. As I understand it, Neptune is proposing this to generate revenue for the Township…not specifically for OG. $350K plus or minus is NOT a lot of revenue to be spread out through Neptune Township. I’m all for a solution that makes parking in OG a more agreeable experience and, as a homeowner, I would like to see some careful thought given to the needs of tax paying homeowners who abide by the preservation guidelines that living in a National Historic Site require. These guidelines make this town such a desirable place for us to live and for others to visit. It is the property owners who bear the expense of maintaining their individual structures (homes, commercial buildings) according to historic guideline — this is not inexpensive — but an investment we all were aware of when deciding to live and own in this town.
Others have suggested parking permits for residences…who will bear the cost of ticketing and towing “illegally” parked vehicles? This weekend someone parked their oversized SUV in a handicapped parking spot although the car did not have a handicap parking permit. Not only that, but it was too long for the angle parking so it pulled up onto the sidewalk in front of our neighbors’ home. The car was ticketed…and there it sat…all day…ticketed…blocking the sidewalk with the owner of the SUV clearly unconcerned about about any of it. Parking is an issue that looms large for our town and I’m all for a thoughtful study of solutions. A vibrant business district is to everyone’s benefit — homeowners and visitors alike. But any solution must take into account the needs of those of us who live here; go grocery shopping; have guests and maybe would like to leave town on a Saturday or Sunday without despairing of finding a parking spot upon our return. I look forward to all comments. Thank you, Paul, for this forum for an intelligent exchange of ideas.
tmartin@trishmartin.com
Trish Martin ”
1
Here is my two cents, as someone who lives in an urban setting during the week and is used to parking issues:
I am not opposed to annual permits for residents if there is a great need to generate income. But I strongly oppose parking meters on Main for a number of reasons. Among these are that meters are aesthetically unappealing, to say the least, as well as unlikely to generate enough income in the off season to make them worthwhile.
I am wondering why we do not create visitor parking lots? It seems there is unused land at either end of town that could be converted into parking areas for which visitors could pay a (reasonable) daily or hourly fee. This would reduce the frustration homeowners experience when they are unable to park anywhere near their residences during summer months, and would also generate income. The burden for increasing revenue should not fall entirely on those who already contribute via property taxes that are far too high as it is.
This is ludicrous. Of course people who have no skin in the game except additional revenue from other people will vote for it. As I’ve said before, it is simply inconceivable to impose meters without providing for some resident-only parking on the side streets in OG.
Neptune had better be careful what it wishes for. If property taxes keep rising, OG homeowners keep getting inconvenienced and tortured by parking issues and meter shenanigans, it won’t be long before people start to leave for greener pastures. Property values go down, along with revenues. It won’t be that hard to kill the golden goose.
“Committeeman Randy Bishop and Mayor Mary Beth Jahn both seemed open to the idea. Jahn said a referendum “would give a lot of people a voice,” and Bishop said he had been hearing lately from people outside Ocean Grove “who are getting interested” because parking meters near the OG boardwalk and in the business district might relieve some of the need for higher property taxes throughout the township.”
Folks, simply put; this is DOUBLE SPEAK for the Mayor being able to change her vote to FOR parking meters.
She will have the comfort of a biased poll behind her.
AS WELL..Manning will have the comfort of being able to vote WITHOUT fear of facing the voters.
The Township Committee needs to be held accountable starting RIGHT NOW.
The Historic Preservation Plan Element of the Neptune Township Master Plan states the following:
(statement by the Planning Board)
“Ocean Grove is recognized as a model within the planning and historic preservation
community.”
The Mission Statement of the Camp Meeting Association is in part: “To provide a place for spiritual renewal”
There is a peaceful and historic spirit in Ocean Grove.”
This spirit is under attack by the Neptune Township Committee’s proposal to place parking meters into Ocean Grove.
Just say “No” to parking meters. Just say “Yes” to Historic Preservation, with all due respect.
Jack Bredin
“