Parking permits fall short of goal; consistent enforcement needed

At this point, you’ve probably complained, as well as heard other students complain to no end, about the new parking permit system at MHCC.

Although it’s not a hefty cost — with prices at $25 a term and $75 for an annual pass — it’s still an added weight to a financially strained student body which also had to bear the burden of increased tuition.

Of course, the spike in tuition and the addition of these new fees is understandable when considering the deficit that MHCC must make up in order to balance the budget, but the real issue here is the effectiveness of the implementation of the program.

In an initial estimate by MHCC, projected revenues for the fall, winter and spring term were expected to total $630,000. In more recent projections on Sept. 30, estimates fell to $450,000 after permit sales failed to meet initial estimations.

The total costs for the installation of the new technology, the signs and the permits themselves equaled $200,000.

Around $140,000 has been generated this fall term for parking, which is 40 percent less than what was estimated. When you consider the $200,000 investment, the college has yet to break even.

Another issue The Advocate feels needs attention is the fact that enforcement for this new permit system has not been the best.

In an investigation in the parking lots carried out by The Advocate on Wednesday night around 7:30 p.m., we found that of the 317 cars parked in lots C, D, F, G and H, 34 were without permits. Of those 34 without permits, zero had citations.

That is a loss of $850 in potential revenue over the course of one night alone. If this has been a week-long problem that’s a loss of $4,250 in revenue over the course of five days.

For the rest of us that have bought permits, this is very unfair.

With all these people slipping through the cracks and getting away with not buying permits, not only is it unfair for those with permits, but it’s clear the school isn’t pressuring students to buy permits to help make the money that the parking system was projected to generate.

After all, if we were to go to school without a permit, and can expect not to receive any kind of citation, why would we buy a permit in the first place?

What needs to be realized is that every time an investment is made, there’s a risk being taken. In this case, the risk was $200,000.

Anyone fully aware of the financial predicament the school is in, when corners are cut and fines have added increased burden to students, knows this is not an amount to be idly tossed aside.

Although decisions such as these ultimately rest with the administration and the district board, The Advocate hopes those responsible for seeing the parking and citation system through to a stage of success will re-evaluate their current operations and make a dramatic adjustment to provide justice as well as to deliver the revenue promised.

Nonetheless, we would like to remind them that the students are the ones that will have to pay when a risk doesn’t pay off or when deals go awry, and frankly, that’s a risk that we just can’t afford.