Sheffield Council's 1.2 Million Profits from Parking Permits!

[Dentzler]

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/anger-over-1-2-million-permit-scheme-profits-for-sheffield-council-1-5989646

 

Do you think these exhorbent profits from Sheffield's Parking Permits are acceptable?

Edited August 28, 2013 by Dentzler

[geared]

The figure does include money generated from pay and display schemes tho, so the thread title is mis-leading.

The article does give a breakdown of income, but does not give a breakdown of costs for the various schemes.

 

how do you know that the cost to run the permit scheme isn't the same as it's income, and all the profit is generated from fines and from pay and display???

[LeMaquis]

http://www.thestar.co.uk/news/local/anger-over-1-2-million-permit-scheme-profits-for-sheffield-council-1-5989646

 

Do you think these exhorbent profits from Sheffield's Parking Permits are acceptable?

 

If you are going to use, and mis-spell, exorbitant, then you're just encouraging people to vote no. The article says the profits are spent on transport, which is in line with national law. So yes, they are acceptable.

[Resident]

Hello Penistone999.

[Planner1]

The figure does include money generated from pay and display schemes tho, so the thread title is mis-leading.

The article does give a breakdown of income, but does not give a breakdown of costs for the various schemes.

 

how do you know that the cost to run the permit scheme isn't the same as it's income, and all the profit is generated from fines and from pay and display???

 

As far as I am aware, the Council gave the Star the following information when they were asked to comment on the potential story:

 

The Lib Dems have included all income from pay and display which is not connected to parking permits. The PPZ income is £522,000 the income from enforcement is £669,000, which means the total income is £1.191 million. The cost of providing the service is £1.255 million, the council is still subsidising the permit zones by over £100,000, so there is no ‘profit’.

 

The Star chose not to print this information. They just said:

 

But ruling Labour councillors said income from parking permits alone does not cover the cost of running the zones...

[Resident]

As far as I am aware, the Council gave the Star the following information when they were asked to comment on the potential story:

 

The Lib Dems have included all income from pay and display which is not connected to parking permits. The PPZ income is £522,000 the income from enforcement is £669,000, which means the total income is £1.191 million. The cost of providing the service is £1.255 million, the council is still subsidising the permit zones by over £100,000, so there is no ‘profit’.

 

The Star chose not to print this information. They just said:

 

But ruling Labour councillors said income from parking permits alone does not cover the cost of running the zones...

 

In before the accusations from Penistone999/Dentzler/Happ Hazzard that you're just a council puppet.

 

So basically this boils down to inaccurate and lazy journalism to create a sensationalistic headline regardless of the true information being given on request.

[Mecky]

But I thought they overspent by £8.3m or whatever, so where's the profit suddenly cpme from?

[Litotes]

As far as I am aware, the Council gave the Star the following information when they were asked to comment on the potential story:

 

The Lib Dems have included all income from pay and display which is not connected to parking permits. The PPZ income is £522,000 the income from enforcement is £669,000, which means the total income is £1.191 million. The cost of providing the service is £1.255 million, the council is still subsidising the permit zones by over £100,000, so there is no ‘profit’.

 

The Star chose not to print this information. They just said:

 

But ruling Labour councillors said income from parking permits alone does not cover the cost of running the zones...

 

 

But this does not tally with the information from an FOI request which indicated that the surplus was nearly a million after the cost of providing the service was taken into account.

 

 

Could perhaps... the council have been telling porkies to either myself or the Star?

[dutch]

Ah money.

 

One moment you get some another time you lose it and then it comes back again.

What would we do without it.

[Penistone999]

As far as I am aware, the Council gave the Star the following information when they were asked to comment on the potential story:

 

The Lib Dems have included all income from pay and display which is not connected to parking permits. The PPZ income is £522,000 the income from enforcement is £669,000, which means the total income is £1.191 million. The cost of providing the service is £1.255 million, the council is still subsidising the permit zones by over £100,000, so there is no ‘profit’.

 

The Star chose not to print this information. They just said:

 

But ruling Labour councillors said income from parking permits alone does not cover the cost of running the zones...

 

But the council only incur costs because they implement these stupid un-necessary schemes in the first place . The cost`s they incur are completely self inflicted .