By Linda Scott
Watertown Resident
This will be a short one.
About 10 months ago, this appeared on Reddit:
Watertown Winter Parking Ban update
TLDR: Watertown Councilor Tony Palomba is working to petition and amend the winter parking ban. Email him at councilorpalomba@gmail.com to sign the petition, share your feedback, and learn more.
“Hi Folks, I am sending this email to those of you who have contacted me regarding the Winter Parking Ban (Ban) at some point in the last year and a half. My apologies of the long delay in coming up with a way to get this important issue in front of the City Council for a public hearing and vote. As you may know there is considerable opposition to amending the Ban from the police and fire departments, members of the administration and some councilors. However, I am fully supportive of amending the Ban and after discussion with others who are also supportive I think the best route to get the issue in front of the Council is to use the Citizen Petition procedure that is described in our City Charter. In brief, a group of residents can require the City Council to take up an issue if they collect 150 signatures of registered voters. Of course you would want to get many more to demonstrate strong support for the issue. The signatures are submitted to the City Clerk who will certify the first 150 and then pass the petition to the Council Clerk and members of the Council. The Council has three months to hold a public hearing on the petition and then vote to reject or accept it. I have drafted a petition, the form of which was approved by the City Clerk. However, it is important that this effort is resident-driven. I would like to meet with those of you who would be interested in pursuing a Citizens Petition. Therefore I want to offer two different zoom meetings with the goal of getting as many people as possible to attend to review the petition and to discuss their involvement in the effort. I am proposing Saturday, April 20 at 6:00 PM and Sunday, April 21 at 5:00 PM. Please respond to this email if you are available one or both of these days and times. I will send you a zoom link and attach the draft petition. I do not anticipate these meetings will last more than an hour. Please reply if you are not available on either day and I will make sure to connect with you following the meetings. I should note that gathering signatures, as many as possible, and having the petition certified by the City Clerk, is the first step in winning approval for amending the Ban by the full Council. But it is the most important step and If everyone who is receiving this email can get 10 signatures, we will already have more than 150! I look forward to hearing from you. Of course if you have any questions, please do not hesitate to call me. Best, Tony Palomba”
Since then, Tony’s gotten the requisite 150 signatures to bring it forward. They have hundreds more, but do they count? You have to be a registered voter to count.
The meeting is on January 21, 2025 from 6 to 9 p.m. at City Hall. There’ll be lots of time (3 hours) to express your views on this matter of community safety. It would be interesting if Councilors, when asking for the usual name and address before residents speak to also ask them to include whether they have a parking space at their residence. (Any residents who don’t have a place to park, shame on their landlords for deceiving them. The sin of omission … forgetting to let the unsuspecting future tenant know that a parking space does not come along with their rent).
There are other interpretations. Maybe the tenant was told, but it just didn’t seem to matter to them at the time. … Shortsightedness strikes again.
In a conversation with a Watertown resident, we were both puzzled why Councilor Palomba wasn’t more straightforward about his involvement in this. On past issues, he has been much more transparent, attaching his name to the issue, not ghostwriting petitions.
Anyway, I’m writing the councilors on this matter. It’s important for them to know where citizens stand on this. Please reach out by writing or calling all of the councilors by Sunday night.
Here’s the e-mail to reach them all at the same time:
citycouncilors@watertown-ma.gov
All the City Councilors individual email addresses and phone numbers are available at https://www.watertown-ma.gov/350/City-Council
Anyway, petition or not, I’m counting on the good sense of the majority of City Councilors to do what’s right (and safe) for this community. As Tony Palomba pointed out 1o months ago, the police and fire departments are against this, and may I add … for a good reason!
Dear OP
I find your letter very disturbing
I did not because of the topic or your position
Your use of the term assault is incorrect and Offensive.
definitions:
a: a violent physical or verbal attack
b: a military attack usually involving direct combat with enemy forces (an assault on the enemy’s air base)
c: a concerted effort (as to reach a goal or defeat an adversary) such as an assault on drug trafficking
in this setting would be: a strong verbal attack.”the assault on the party’s tax policies”
Everyone needs to think about their personal reasoning to support or oppose changes in the way we live together as a group. You support the ban and have laid out your reasons.
You’ve also provided contact information so others can express their opinions -this is really helpful as not everyone has easy access to that information or the time to find it
If citizens asking to be heard by their government and their fellow citizens are framed as engaged in a violent attack, (when framed without violent or threatening language), we are all doomed.
We cannot hear each other, we can’t influence each other, we can’t come to a compromise or an agreement to change or not change the status quo, or even respectfully disagree. No matter the outcome, no matter how many people support the status quo or change, people walk away exhausted, angry and more unwilling to listen to each other -it’s no different than a one on one or small group conversation.
As I’ve read your letters over time on different subjects, I finally have to ask you to consider the fact that effective, passionate advocacy for yourself and others can be done without attacks.
Dear Devon,
Relax. Assault can be a figure of speech when it is used a descriptor of an action.
It should not be taken as offensive as it is not meant as a physical action.
Good for you for speaking up about it as often words are used to incite harm.
So you applaud my speaking up because words can hurt, they can incite (which is the meaning I take here -the OP trying to motivate people to stand up and fight against something she believes is wrong and I applaud her for standing up and speaking her mind)
but I should ‘relax’ and think about the person’s intent rather than impact. I don’t know what century you’re living in but it’s clearly not this one.
I think it’s important to educate each other on impact, definitions and reality.
My position on using the term assault has not changed
I agree 100% with Devon Scott. I’ve witnessed the same over the past 2 years, particularly regarding issues related to building more housing. I believe there is a group of residents in Watertown which actually *wants* to attack instead of collaborate. It seems to be rooted in resentment about the physical changes we’ve seen in Watertown over the past several years, and a reflexive rejection of the idea of a modern city. “Small town” is the phrase I’ve heard most often from them. I think they perceive their way of life to be threatened. But what they fail to realize is that they can live their own way and let others live as they wish.
P.S. I support modification of the winter parking ban too.
Dear OP
As a learning point for me, could you tell me where to find the requirement that people signing citizen petitions must be registered voters?
Having not been involved in trying to get an issue before the public and the council, it would be helpful for me to understand.
if you have the time, my quick search of the city’s website was not productive.
Thank you
I believe you have to be a registered voter in this case as it would amend an ordinance. The city clerk can confirm. cityclerk@watertown-ma.gov I know one has to be when one signs candidates’ papers or supports a ballot measure.
The record of registered voters and party affiliation are available via the Annual Resident List. The library has hard copies and the Election Commissions publishes an e-file.
The police and fire department are against any change to the existing system because the money they collect from fines goes directly to funding their departments.
Making the common sense change that puts a parking ban in place when there is actual snow accumulation on the ground is the correct move by the local government. If it is safe to park over night during the summer, then it is safe to park overnight in the winter when there is no snow on the ground.
I will go on assuming that your “safe to park” commentary refers to not getting a ticket versus getting your car ripped off. With that in mind, let’s go over what the regulations mandate:
Watertown Parking Regulations
Parking on all Watertown streets is prohibited for more than one hour between 1 a.m. and 6 a.m. This regulation is strictly enforced from November through April.
Parking on all Watertown streets is prohibited for more than two consecutive hours from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m. daily, Monday through Saturday unless otherwise posted.
Whether we a have snow ban in place or not, vehicles cannot be parked (or as Mr. Palomba’s followers would prefer: storing private property in public places) for more that one or two hours, except on Sunday or some places. Period. There is no ambiguity there, is there?
Our Police Department is not as near as draconian as say, Belmont, where you will get ticketed very quickly. I was, twice. But here, they are be very reasonable and nice; say thanks.
I trust our officials will leave things are they are. A few disgruntled voices should not change what we have and prefer, just because they don’t like it. Move somewhere else where you can park, sorry, store when and where you want.
No my “safe to park” is in regards to the argument made in previous posts that the ban is in place so that first responder vehicles can get down the more narrow streets in an emergency. If they can make it up the roads during the summer when no parking ban is in place then they should be able to make it up the roads in the winter when there is no snow on the ground.
And your point is exactly why the law should be changed. It is not be up to the WPD to selectively enforce a law or ordinance that is on the books. Their job is only to enforce what is written.
So the Council should rewrite the law to give explicit guidelines on when a parking ban can be enforced. (dates, times, weather conditions, etc..)
Throughout the the comments and in the original post the word “safer” is being used to describe the effects of the parking ban, but I don’t see any corroborating evidence to support that (except when there is actual snow). What purpose does the parking ban serve absent snow accumulation? It is an incredible inconvenience for residents who do not have off street parking. Emergency vehicle access during the times of the parking ban assumes emergencies are more prevalent at night and from November to April than other times, otherwise we would have a parking ban in effect 24/7. I would be more in favor of resident permit parking if the concern is overnight parking by non residents but I doubt that is much of an issue. I fail to see the “safer” argument but am willing the convinced if someone could provide non-theoritcal evidence or examples.
Chris, one of the intended effects of the parking ban is that streets can be plowed curb to curb. If there were no parking ban, guaranteed this would not be the case. There would be scofflaw vehicles that would impede the plowing. And those folks would be angry if their vehicles got towed.
Plowing curb to curb does indeed make our streets safer when there is snow–like this morning. For those who say that it doesn’t snow significantly anymore, I’d remind that only a few years ago we had huge snow piles on our streets. It will happen again.
These arguments never make any sense. Streets can be plowed curb to curb with snow emergencies too. It’s like people think it only snows at night or something. Nobody who is in favor of removing the winter ban is also in favor of removing snow emergencies. The idea is to enact the ban when it’s actually needed, as opposed to casting a net that is just as narrow as it is wide — 5 hours a day for 4 months a year.
I 100% agree – “except for when there is snow.” Some who support not amending the ban were against the City enforcing the snow shoveling ordinance. The logic is nowhere to be found. Without logic, it appears to be about the convenience of some under certain circumstances. I find that there are too many traffic rules that don’t make us safer and not enough of the kind that would actually make us safer. And some rules and ordinances no longer make any sense especially when they concern how people actually live today. I suppose if one lives the life of a hermit or suburban mid century wife or feudual lord of the manor, then I guess it makes sense to ensure the land surrounding your abode is unoccupied at all times. Very, very few residents live that way and some don’t even want to live that way. Safety in these scenarios are truly in the eye of the beholder.
Sorry: …”as they are…”, that is.
The arguments for safety cannot by made by anyone who was against the enforcement of the snow shoveling ordinance or very much for the installation of grassy turf. (I have watched both on Zoom) The later has a high probability of being toxic and unsafe, but not enforcing the first is completely unsafe, and would also hamper Police and Fire from performing their jobs. I do hope that the council duly notes these illogical stances.
This is called talking out of both sides of one’s mouth. The more cynical would say, “I care when convenient for me but not when it’s inconvenient for you.” It’s relativism to the nth degree, and safety doesn’t operate well under such parameters. If safety is the utmost concern, then how can residents overlook the safety concerns of those who need to park close to their residences – walking at night, in the cold, on ice. Doing it with a physical disability is more precarious. Does getting back and forth to a lot for a snow parking ban comply with ADA law?
I completely agree with Eric York. The fee is not exorbitant to some as they park all year round on the street even when it snows. They just take the ticket every time. For those whom it takes a bigger portion of their budgets, such as renters most of whom are young, disabled, elderly or economically disadvantage, it is a different case. And with 50% of residents being renters, it unfairly burdens most of that population. Make it make sense.
Either provide more parking with no more than 0.25 of mile walk or stop ticketing when it does not snow.
Thank you for the attention to this detail. I’m sure there are many people who are annoyed and inconvenienced by the rule.
I don’t think anyone who has lived in this area for more than a few years would think that lifting the winter parking ban is a good idea. That said, all ideas on how to make it better are worth listening to. I have experienced winters of heavy snow that can cripple a city for a long time and create serious health and transportation difficulties. We have been fortunate to not have had large snow falls for some years, but that will likely change as that is what the weather does. Fact – many if not most of our streets are too narrow for both parking and travel when there isn’t snow, let alone when there is.
If there is a proposal to have citizen participation on street travel and parking ordinances, then it seems that this would be the place to have discussions and propose fair changes to this rule. Having off-street parking is important, and having it during snow is essential.
I would expect that if you have a rule that is inconsistent, then undoubtedly you will have a lot more inadvertent law breakers and more of the fines that everyone would like to avoid.
Hi
I posted two replies. Did my first my go through? Or did I not add my name? Sorry, I certainly meant too. Sometimes I hit send to fast.
Thanks,
Rita
I believe both were received and are up
I see it now. Thanks!
When I lived in Brighton and then West Roxbury, there was alternate side parking for the winter season. It did not work very well. It’s easy for me here in Watertown, because I do have off-street parking at my house. It is unquestionably safer and easier to get around with the ban in effect here. I agree with the point that many of our streets are narrow. Perhaps a compromise is to give citations (with a small fine, if any), when there is no snow, and charge a bigger fine when there is snow. In the last snow, someone left his/her car out overnight, and it did make a difference in how effective street clearing could be.
What an idiotic letter, full of self-serving demonization of people the writer disagrees with. Thousands of Watertown residents are clearly opposed to this old ban that came into being decades ago and long before the climate warming set in and made it redundant. Just look at this year and last year, so little snow, hardly any snow emergency, and yet so much unnecessary headache, including financial for tickets, for so many citizens, who don’t have the author’s luxury of a private drive way and have to park on the street. The origin of the ban is exactly what dictates removing it, i.e., the fact that this year alone after a few months, there still hasn’t been one snow emergency. A NEW LAW IS NEEDED TAILORED TO THE INFREQUENT SNOW EMERGENCIES, IF ANY. An even easier route is to suspend it just as it was during the christmas holiday, with no fuss made about it by police or the fire department!
I would refrain from implying that someone is an idiot and then going on to talk about “self serving demonization”. It’s not a good look.
There are two sides to this issue and probably facts that you don’t know. So don’t be so quick to call your neighbors names. Just state your case.
Well said.
“Idiotic”?? How about if I were to call your comment moronic, or imbecilic? You know, obsolete terms to describe mental shortcomings with which you may be familiar. But I will not. Instead, I will refer you to a simple quote: “You can’t always get what you want”. Deal with it, and treat members of this board with respect. If you don’t like our regulations, just move
Bye.
Personally, I could lean either way for or against the ban, *BUT* if I had to choose one or the other, I’d vote for eliminating it. Even though I have a driveway, I prefer to park on the street for convenience and for safety reasons (its a blind driveway, with a lot of cars and pedestrians passing by and I have to be real careful pulling out of it).
On the other end, I’m aware that this topic has been around for ages (as has the property owners shoveling the sidewalks in front of their homes). But this is the first time I’m aware of that anyone has put forth a petition and with this much determination. Which makes me wonder if this is a gentrifier grievance from those unhappy with a long standing policy, or are long time residents also jumping on the band wagon?
On one hand I get that it’s a PITA, inconvenience for some, but OTOH its hard to sympathize with those that moved here without doing their proper homework and then realized that there was a winter parking ban in place
Many long-term residents are onboard. There is a slew of them on Facebook. There was a 2011 online petition, in which approximately 1000 residents signed. This is a case where new and old residents are quite aligned. I have a large driveway, but to me it is about the city treating residents differently. One need not be a renter to have this problem or a new resident. It is very easy for a long term to fall into this situation. You had no driveway when you bought 25 years ago but now you have a disability brought on by age or work or illness. Or you have a family member in that condition. Now you have to walk to the lot in the cold and dark on iced paths. With public transit not working well, a lot of people need cars to north, west and south for jobs. Not everyone has a WFH job and companies a pushing hard for a return to office. Plus today, we have technology to alert the public 48 hours before a storm hits. As of yesterday, I have gotten 1 text, 2 robo calls and an e-mail. Bottom line, things changes and we need to adapt.
I had planned to respond to both Eric and Devan, but they seemed to have been addressed by others in this discussion. Thank you, David, Rita and Erik.
As for Eric’s claim that the safety levels are the same all year round (winter and summer) for parking in Watertown, there are some significant differences between street parking in the summer and street parking in the winter. Visibility…it’s darker earlier and longer in the winter. Random icy patches that can make stopping in time impossible as cars drive out of their driveways with obstructed views from parked cars. Many people do not adequately clean their windshields and mirrors, causing blinding glare and limited visibility, to name a few.
The winter parking ban starts at 1am. There is zero sunlight at 1am in both summer and winter. So that’s a moot point.
Random icy patches can making stopping difficult in all circumstances, with or without street parking. Maybe we should just ban winter driving altogether?
Many people do not clean their windshields in the winter or summer, regardless of street parking. Maybe we should just ban cars and driving altogether?
You’ve got some weak arguments for someone who is so vehemently opposed to something.
Hi Tim,
Have you had a chance to carefully read the petition? The word “significant” is used several times in this petition, which opens up a real quagmire… who is to decide what is “significant” in terms of snow? That word “significant” does not specify how much snow is left in piles on the street after a storm and if people will be able to park when there are snow piles narrowing the streets even more.
It does not take into account the parking habits of many drivers who, even in the good weather, park on Watertown sidewalks, prohibiting the disabled from traversing our streets…talk about a “social justice issue.”
This thing was written with more holes in it than Swiss cheese!
Finally, the two words that pop up most frequently in this discussion are: Safety and Convenience. Which word do you think should take precedence in a caring community?
Linda:
Very classy response to an ad-hominem attack. I have no class, so I will address Mr. Bowen’s comment in a fashion with which he should be comfortable.
BTW. Safety trumps convenience every time.