CPA working on reinstating parking fees at airport
Almost 11 months after the Commonwealth Ports Authority made parking free at the Francisco C. Ada-Saipan International Airport, management is now working on having the parking fees reinstated.
CPA decided to open the airport parking lot without charge starting Dec. 1, 2014. However, in their recent board meeting on Sept. 28, CPA executive director Maryann Lizama told the board that the parking booth system will be reinstated in fiscal year 2016; the fiscal year 2016 starts today, Oct. 1.
Lizama noted that CPA’s analysis of the parking booth system is that it will cost the ports authority about $250,000 to expand the parking lot at the terminal. She said the cost of expansion could not be supported without revenue generation. At the same time, because of the free parking, vehicles sometimes park for days if not weeks at a time, resulting in other vehicles parking in grassy areas and scattering litter in the parking lot.
“We have given the public a year’s reprieve from the booth fees, but we will be reinstating that. Fees will go up but it will be announced to the public and given proper notification with regards to the fees and when the parking booth will be in effect,” she said.
CPA board member Thomas Villagomez, however, opposed the reinstatement of the parking booth system, saying it never benefitted the CPA.
POI Aviation was managing the parking booth system under a contract with CPA that expired in Nov. 30, 2015. CPA made the decision not to renew the contract, saying it was not making a profit out of the parking booth.
“I have suggested already that we put a sign in there to restrict parking to a certain time and assess fees and penalties. I believe CPA is authorized to issue tickets to impose fines,” Villagomez said.
“I think we can try to implement that program [imposing charges and fees]. With this enforcement there, there will be collection. I don’t think anybody here in the Commonwealth respects anything when it comes to parking,” he added.
CPA board member Barrie Toves agreed with Villagomez, echoing his statement that they took out the parking booth system because of lost revenue.
Toves said it would be better to implement Villagomez’s strategy on fees and fines and that if that didn’t work out, then reinstating the parking booth would be the second option.
Toves proposed that an analysis be made first on the requirements for imposing fines and charges for the parking lot at the airport.
What’s the craze to impose a myriad of fees? Has the economy made powerful strides granting households powerful buying power that we want to siphon off a little? When was the last time salary raises were given? Wasn’t it 14 years ago?
Salaries and wages have remained the same (stagnant) for the last 14 years and you still want to pull more pennies from our empty pockets?
Imposing parking restrictions and penalties for those who don’t follow those restrictions is part of good management of the airport, provided that the restrictions solve a real problem.
However, having rules just to impose fines, or charging for parking just to get revenue are not management. They are taxes – taxes that were not approved by the public.
It is really important that we do not follow what cities on the mainland are doing, which is allowing government departments to impose fees at will just to get revenue. This quickly sprials out of control to the point that fees are everywhere and don’t have any relation to the service being provided. For example, paying a $500 permit fee when you fix your sidewalk, even though the government does nothing to help you fix the sidewalk. This kind of thing is common in the states.
A department should work within its budget. If it can’t, it needs to ask for more funds and show justification. Legislators can give them more if it appears justified, or even not give them more when it is justified but there isn’t enough money. Legislators can always make their case to the public for a tax. This process is called “taxation with representation”. It gives the public the power to decide what it wants to pay for and how much it is willing to pay.
Allowing CPA to impose fees just because it doesn’t have the funds it wants in its budget, amounts to taxation without representation. Is that where we really want to go?
Let’s ask CPA to course this wonderful idea through the leyisleche!