When I was in Pasadena, I learned that their parking meter district in Old Pasadena receives 25% of the gross revenue to go toward streetscape enhancements (capital projects) within the district. The City receives the remaining amount and receives all revenue from parking enforcement. The parking district doesn't have any direct expenditures related to receiving the revenue.
This was the first I had heard of such a system. In Minneapolis, it's my understanding that all of the revenue goes to the City. I have a call in to find out if a certain percentage of those funds are directed toward improvements within the districts that have meters.
Anyone know much about this sort of thing?
This seems like a great way for Business Improvement Districts / etc. to get access to capital for infrastructure. It also seems like the "right" thing to do, since parking meters are intended (as typically discussed by Public Works / Transportation Depts) to serve as a way to increase turnover in areas where there's a high demand for short-term on-street parking. So if the revenue exceeds the costs to provide the service, why not allow the districts to receive "their cut"?