Report Claims City Will Break Even on Parking Measure

City analysts are saying that a measure that'll save drivers the quarters in their pockets won't cost the city a dime.

Councilman Dan Halloran, R-Whitestone, is under the impression that the bill will save motorists a little money. But it would seem that the City Council’s Finance Division doesn’t see it that way, since they put a $0 price tag on the bill’s fiscal impact statement.

Halloran is making a logical leap that drivers will be able to save a couple quarters here and there, while they use the same unexpired muni receipt for different parking spots around town to run errands.

“This legislation makes good sense and will help drivers save a bit more of their hard-earned money,” he said in a statement to Patch.

There are different spots in the City that charge a bit more for parking, so the thing to remember is that receipts are only good in spots where time units are priced the same or less as where the receipt was purchased.

Use lower priced time units purchased in Queens to park in higher priced sections of Manhattan, and you’ll be vulnerable to a ticket—a much bigger piece of revenue for the city.

But inexplicably, the City Council’s Finance Division says the bill will have no revenue implications on this city one way or another. Neither bring more money in, nor keep more money out of muni meters.

We asked a spokesperson for the City Council what calculations or data were used to determine that a measure to save drivers money wouldn’t lessen the city’s take.

We examined two of the bill’s Committee Reports to see if the finance analyst working on the bill, Chima Obichere, had explained just how the city expected to break even.

But there was no analysis of that kind presented in the two official committee reports. The report dated May 15, 2012 had a curious annotation indicating that a Council Policy Analyst, Gafar Zaaloff, had deleted part of the Committee Report.

We asked a City Council spokesperson, Robin Levine, to explain the annotation, and provide whatever analysis had been removed.

She would not speak to it on the record. Nor would she explain how the Finance Division figured that the city wouldn’t lose money as drivers saved it.

The only statement she was willing to make on the record was one that affirmed the mystery.

“The legislation is expected to have zero revenue impact,” she said.