Men, Machines and the City of Nanaimo – A Letter to Council
Ron Bolin: Oct.28, 2012
Mayor Ruttan and Councillors:
I note from Monday’s agenda that you will be asked to approve the issuance of an RFP for parking equipment and related items. While the rationale for this request is easily understood, there are related matters raised by it which deserve consideration and on which I would appreciate your consideration.
There is a relation between technology and manpower which, it seems to me, has been overlooked in the report before you . Technology in the area of parking control has come a long way since the era of simple machine per space meters which report only directly on a machine by machine basis and require significant “boots on the ground”. For this reason I find it difficult to understand how we could make a decision about staffing before we have determined the technology to be employed. Adding staff is a long term commitment in both present and future costs, particularly, it seems to me, in a case such as this where there are to be two management staff to only three operations staff in a unit of five.
Systems are available which automate the parking control process to a very high degree. Such a system may or may not be economically feasible for Nanaimo, but consideration of their economics will certainly involve the costs of staffing them. These trade-offs will not be known until the Parking equipment RFP has been issued and answered. I ask that you consider this trade-off carefully before you commit fully to a manpower plan which may prove disadvantageous to Nanaimo and its taxpayers.
Posts and Comments on Nanaimo Governance 
Do they ever answer your wonderfully logical letters? I wish you were on the Council.
Good Afternoon Mr Bolin
I do agree with many of your points, very much in line with our interest in utilizing current technology to better deliver the parking service. We also believe in using technology to gain efficiency for our foot patrollers. The significant difference is that our patrollers will be able to provide a valued service to the downtown while on foot and will use current technology to enhance their role. For the city, the security component of value-added service also has weight and merit in delivering a service that meets all the needs of a downtown.
Our roll-out by RFP will also consider efficient use of technology for patrollers including handheld violation systems that use computer programs which allow for wireless transmission of enforcement activities to the main back office computer which also ties in to; finances, trouble reports and merchant based sales. The handheld enforcement tool is advanced and allows for quick monitoring of violations. We also will look more into the role of mobile licence plate recognition (LPR) in the future but that is outside of the intent of this forthcoming RFP. This technology can work with foot patrols in a downtown area.
We have looked extensively at the present ability of technology to enhance delivering the parking function. We monitor progress in this field closely and the RFP we are preparing will require the successful contractor to be capable of providing modern technology in our parkades and parking lots. In this case, it will mean providing the City thru leasing modern equipment in our parking and parking lots that require multi-space meters capable of handling cash, credit cards and being compatible to new features including LPR.
Technology will also improve our ability to regulate parking and it is our intention to deploy these advances as it makes fiscal sense. The future will hold consideration of mobile licence plate recognition when the business plan warrants such consideration. We have received information from providers of this technology and weighed its potential for use. Right now we have 300 single space meters in the area of downtown. Over time there will be opportunities in a few locations to consider multi-space metering similar to used in the City of Victoria. Our locations will be minimal at this time as it requires a high volume of traffic to warrant the costs associated to deploying. Based on our current situation, we will continue to be using a large number of single space meters well into the future.
The concern for the City is to consider and deploy such technology when economically feasible considering:
· The “Digital Payment Technology” parking meters deployed throughout the downtown parkades, Maffeo Sutton & Brechin boat launch are technologically up to date and allow for further incorporation of technology like licence plate recognition capabilities.
· Regardless of the hardware we still need “boots on the ground” and the plan has been thought out to provide basic security needs coupled with enforcement and ambassadorial duties.
· The physical size of the downtown – small/dense area means that “boots on the ground” are the preferred delivery method of parking, security and ambassadorial role for our patrollers,
· Some jurisdictions have taken the “ fully automated “ route however it’s very expensive to jump into this completely.
· The wise move is to slowly incorporate technology as the parking plan unfolds vs. jumping into costly purchases without a sound business plan that supports such deployment in keeping with the need.
We will always want to have “boots on the ground” in our downtown because the role they provide is much more than parking. It is the physical presence of a patroller who provides human aspect of regulation and security – not just technology which does not interact quickly and effectively to public security matters. Patrollers walking downtown do!
(received by email from Randy Churchill, City of Nanaimo, Oct. 29)
WTF.
Big brother courtesy of the taxpayer..
From: Ron Bolin [mailto:rlbolin@telus.net]
Sent: Thursday, November 01, 2012 4:06 PM
To: Randy Churchill
Cc: Mayor&Council; Al Kenning; Ted Swabey; Andrew Tucker
Subject: Parking & Technology
Hi Randy:
First let me apologize for failing to include you my original submission on this issue and thanks for your response.
I can summarize my concerns briefly as breaking down into three categories: technology, personnel and program integrity.
I anticipate that a chance to examine the RFP when it comes out will provide some focus to these issues. I am certain that your knowledge of the technology available is currently much great great than mine, but I have seen very efficient systems which do not require machines for on street parking. I have continued to admire the system in use in Singapore when I worked there and I understand it is still in use.
Coupon parking is a variation of pay and display without the use of machines; instead, the motorist purchases a booklet of coupons in advance from the authorities. To use a parking coupon, the motorist has to completely tear off tabs of the date and time, or scratch off panels on the date and time in which he/she leaves the vehicle. This process is similar to disc parking, except that a parking disc is reusable whereas a coupon can only be used once. In the Republic of Ireland, reusable free-parking discs are unknown and parking coupons are called “parking discs”.[2][3] The coupon is displayed on the dashboard or hung from the top of a door window facing the roadside. Multiple coupons are used if the parking time exceeds the allowance given for a single coupon, though this is not always permitted. The system is widely used in Singapore and Brazil, and in parts of some countries such as New Zealand, Malaysia, Austria, Ireland and Israel. [ see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pay_and_display ]
As mentioned I have some concerns about organizational units in which the ratio of management to operation is 40%. This too may become more clear with the advent of the RFP and is furthermore strongly related to the question of system integrity.
In the area of integrity I have concerns in two areas:
1. the apparent confusion in the report among a number of functions which appear to be only haphazardly folded into one program, and
2. the possibility for the corruption of a system where it appears that the friendly faces of our “boots on the ground” may or may interpret our bylaws. I do not believe that bylaw functions which are strictly defined can be effectively mixed with welcoming and glad handing functions without jeopardizing the legal issues involved and inviting complaints of favouritism. nor should these functions be in the same budget.
As an aside, I believe there are other methods for handling some of our parking issues by the issuance of annual parking stickers for residents who utilize our publicly built and maintained streets for parking, even though I recognize that this is not at issue at this time.
And I cannot help but observe that it seems to me to be extremely inefficient to hire a crew before the boat is acquired.
I will look forward to the RFP.
Thanks Ron!
Once again I’d agree with a lot of what you have to say.
1) We are definitely interested in idea of selling parking thru improved systems be it booklets, pay by phone or merchant paid promotions. Examples you have from elsewhere relevant and good info. Thanks. Technology advanced now and there to support as well.
2) Discretion of patrollers – we will need policy direction in place to limit how “ambassadorial” patrollers can be. A offence is an offence is an offence…… and tickets need to be issued. Example of a fair use of discretion in my view – on a first offence basis there is room to allow for fair discretion when a person returns to their recently expired meter while the patroller is there writing the ticket.
3) Street parking by residents – resident exempt areas – all warrant discussion of how we use the public space. Resident exempt permits without fee does require addressing in my view.
Lot of boat building has been keeping me busy on this one for last few months. Hopefully it will sail level and well!
Randy CHURCHILL
Manager – Bylaw, Regulation & Security
City of Nanaimo,
238 Franklyn St., Nanaimo, B.C.
V9R 5J6
Our roll-out by RFP will also consider efficient use of technology for patrollers including handheld violation systems that use computer programs which allow for wireless transmission of enforcement activities to the main back office computer which also ties in to; finances, trouble reports and merchant based sales. The handheld enforcement tool is advanced and allows for quick monitoring of violations. We also will look more into the role of mobile licence plate recognition (LPR) in the future but that is outside of the intent of this forthcoming RFP. This technology can work with foot patrols in a downtown area.
This goes way beyond “Meter Maid” work.
What come next; fines for bald tires,cracked windshields by these “Ambassadors”?
Given the Federal Governments intention to give private security companies more powers to arrest we have a trainwreck in the making.
Or is it just yet another empire building project that will fleece more tax dollars from an over taxed Nanaimo resident?