Image provided by: SEIU Local 503; Salem, OR
About The OSEA news. (Salem, Oregon) 1970-1981 | View Entire Issue (Feb. 1, 1981)
VOLUME XXIII, NUMBER 1 FEBRUARY 1981 Local 503 o f th e S ervice Em ployes In te rn a tio n a l U nion, AFL-CIO, CLC United front surprises state Parking conflict increases Apparently, the Department of General Services will try to diffuse state employes’ militant response to new parking rules by delaying implementation of increased fees in outlying areas. A 100 percent increase in parking fees went into effect Feb. 1 for employes working in downtown Eugene, Salem and Portland. But a General Ser vices spokesperson said that “it will take us several months to implement (the parking fees) in outlying areas.” “This is an obvious effort by General Services to break the united front state employes have shown over this issue,” said Chuck Mendenhall, OSEA government relations director. “By staggering the implemen tation date, they are hoping to isolate employe outrage to one work unit at a time.” Concern at General Service follows the overwhelming response against the increased parking fees at three public hearings on Jan. 21 and 22. Testimony at a Jan. 21 hear ing in Salem, before an over flow crowd of more than 250 was pointed and emotional. “How can the state charge the going rate for parking and pay less than the going rate for salarie s?” asked P erry Crosley, a Highway Division employe. “These new rules are nothing less than a tax on state em ployes,” said Don Murry, an employe at OSCI. “I strongly object to it, because it will be a tax that is assessed without approval by the people.” Generally speaking, the new rules establish parking fees for all state agencies, except higher education, which sets its own fees. It is up to individual agencies to show that any of its lots should be exempt from the new rules. The rules are an attempt to conform to a 1977 law which is intended to encourage alter native modes of transportation, reduce traffic congestion and provide the state with a “ reasonable retu rn ” on property set aside for parking for state employes. State legis lators, who are provided park ing space beneath the Capitol Building, exempted themselves from the fees. Most parking lots used for state employes are being divided into two categories. Some lots, notably those in downtown Portland, Salem and Eugene, have been declared to be adequately served by mass transportation. A minimum monthly fee of $20 per month, a 100 percent increase, has been established for those lots for day users. The vast majority of state operated lots fall into a second category which, being inad equately served by mass transit, have had a minimum fee of $10 established. Discounted fees previously granted to workers who partici pate in carpools have also been increased by 100 percent. General Services Director Darrell Ralls had the option to delay implementation if he found administration of the rule to be out of context of the law. Instead, fees in downtown Portland, Salem and Eugene went into effect Feb. 1 and a General Services spokesperson said, “My true feeling is that most outlying areas will only be charged $10 for parking.” However, events seem to indicate that legislators’ desire to reduce employe traffic has been met. “A recent survey in Salem shows that upwards of 75 percent of state employes are OSEA opposes fee payment OSEA Executive Director Thomas Gallagher, in a news conference scheduled for Feb. 2, will announce that OSEA suggests that state employes refuse to pay the new parking increase of $20 in protest of “a pay increase in disguise.” “In a time of rising costs, decreasing real income, a lagging state pay schedule and an unrealistic six percent pay-increase proposal, it is ironic that the state employe also faces an increase in p a r k in g f e e s ,” s a id Gallagher. “ With the legislature currently in session, OSEA is seeking legislative action to change the inequities of a blanket parking policy. We propose that General Services cease implementation of the rule change and work jointly with OSEA to formulate a more realistic statute to ad d re ss th e p a r k in g dilemma,” Gallagher ex plained. “State employes should voice their dissatisfaction with the policy and refuse to pay. I can’t imagine General Services trying to tow away thousands of cars.” now participating in mass transit or carpool programs,” Chuck Mendenhall, OSEA government relations director, told the Salem hearing. “I’m confident that even higher per centages are true in the congested areas of Portland. “If I were a skeptic I might look at the revenue side of this issue and note that projected receipts from these new fees are purported to be $769,296 for the 1981-83 biennium.” In concluding his testimony, Mendenhall proposed that General Services cease im plementation of the rule changes and work jointly with OSEA “to help formulate a more realistic statute to ad dress the parking dilemma.” After the hearing Menden hall told reporters that the rule discriminates against single mothers who need their cars to ferry pre-schoolers to and from day care and against clerks, who make less than $700 a month, because the fee excedes these clerks’ .cost of living raises. Mendenhall warned that state employes are ready to take a stand on this issue. “We have put together the organi zation needed to fight this rule; these hearings are only the beginning of the battle if the rule is implemented on Feb. 1.”
