Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Payments topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Milford council tables contract review for proximity-based parking app after public questions
Summary
Council heard a presentation on a no-cost parking payment platform that includes proximity-based advertising and enforcement features; councilors and residents raised questions about scams, kiosks, enforcement and impacts on short-term visitors. Council moved to table the ordinance pending contract review.
Councilors and residents on July 15 discussed a proposal to implement a proximity-based parking payment system in downtown Milford, but the council tabled action so staff can review the vendor contract.
Grant, a presenter for the company (identified in the meeting as the company representative), told the council the platform would be free to the city, provide a back-end parking-management suite and offer “proximity-based offers” that let local businesses target customers using parking transactions. “It costs nothing. There is $0 in setup fees or monthly fees of any kind,” Grant said during his presentation.
The presentation described features including SMS/email payment links for violations, a photo attached to enforcement records, kiosk integration and targeted advertisements tied to parking transactions. Grant estimated kiosks cost $8,000–$10,000 each and said kiosks accounted for about 5% of transactions in one operator’s portfolio. He also proposed an enforcement workflow where attendants take a photo, send the motorist a link to pay, and allow payments via Apple/Google Pay.
Councilors and residents raised several concerns during public comment and committee discussion. Resident Ben Redmond asked how short visits — “less than five minutes” for coffee or quick errands — would be treated to avoid deterring customers. Councilors discussed a 15‑minute grace period and signage or designated short‑term spaces as potential mitigations. A councilor asked whether the app could support demand-sensitive pricing and whether the city could track origin ZIP codes for marketing; Grant said the system stores zone-level data and can be configured for dynamic rates.
Several members voiced fraud and accessibility concerns. One councilor asked whether older residents would mistake a payment link for a scam; Grant said enforcement records include a time‑stamped, geotagged photo of the vehicle and the app uses consistent city branding. Councilors also debated whether to invest in kiosks for people without smartphones; staff noted kiosks are costly and low‑utilization has led some cities to remove them.
City Manager Greg Gunderson recommended tabling the ordinance so legal staff can review contract terms. “We are actually going to table this ordinance. We need to review the contract itself,” Gunderson said in committee.
Council took no final procurement vote at the July 15 meeting; the item was sent back for further review and will be discussed again in Committee of the Whole, per Gunderson’s direction.
