Jackson City Council moves to rescind downtown parking-meter plan after public outcry

Jackson City Council on March 26 moved to rescind its March 11 resolution approving paid parking in the downtown central business district, after a city engineer outlined funding options for the parking system and a string of downtown business owners and residents urged the council to reverse course.

City Engineer Troy White told the council the parking system faces an estimated $403,000 in annual costs and that the city’s options include (1) keeping assessments at last year’s level and slashing services, (2) raising assessments to maintain current services, or (3) increasing assessments and permit/fine revenue to build a fund balance for future improvements. White said the city currently has roughly $43,000 in the parking fund and noted a standing bond payment tied to earlier lot work.

The presentation framed three funding approaches but emphasized that “doing nothing” is not viable because bond obligations remain. White said the budget picture he showed assumed about $190,000 in permit sales, roughly $192,000 in special assessments and some fines to reach the roughly $403,000 cost the city faces to maintain enforcement, plowing, salting and basic repairs.

Why it matters: business owners, nonprofits and market vendors told the council paid parking — the plan discussed included $2-per-hour rates — would depress downtown visits and hurt small merchants and organizations that depend on accessible, short-term parking. Amanda Loveland, executive director of Jackson School of the Arts, said the plan would “significantly burden our community,” noting the school serves hundreds of children weekly and has only 19 on-site spaces.

Public comment ran nearly an hour and featured more than two dozen speakers. Multiple small-business owners said customers told them they would stop coming downtown if meters were installed; farmers-market organizers warned vendors had already made investments assuming continued customer access; and several residents urged the council to put the question to a public vote. Some speakers also called for a closer look at city budgets and alternative revenue sources instead of new user fees.

Following public comment, Council member Davis moved "to go ahead and repeal the parking meters and cancel doing that and then perhaps, form a committee" to study alternatives; the motion was seconded. Council members who spoke after the public comment period said they had heard strong opposition and supported stepping back from the immediate implementation. The council discussed next steps, including forming a task force to refine funding options and to examine changes to assessment rules and enforcement practices.

City staff and council members described the next step as a staff-directed task force rather than a formal committee requiring a separate council motion. The mayor and other council members suggested a task force composition that would include two council members, the city manager, the city engineer, the city assessor’s office and parking staff, with the city manager instructed to assemble participants and start weekly meetings to develop alternatives before the fiscal year end.

What was decided: the council recorded a motion to rescind the March 11, 2025 resolution approving parking-system user fees and related contracts (moved by Council member Davis; seconded by Council member Wood). The transcript does not include the final roll-call tally or an explicit recorded outcome for that rescission motion in the public record included here. Council members and staff agreed to pursue a task-force process to develop alternatives and report back.

Council members and residents differed in proposed fixes. Troy White emphasized the practical limits: without the prior fund balance the city relied on, the city must either cut services, increase assessments, or increase permits/fees and enforce them more strictly. Several downtown owners recommended targeted enforcement of known violators, more transparent accounting of parking-related revenues, or raising assessments rather than installing meters.

The meeting closed with the council asking staff to assemble the task force and to return with options; no implementation of meters occurred at the March 26 special meeting. The council then moved to adjourn.