No new wealth tax, no massive property tax hike, no dependency on Albany or the Feds or even City Council. We can do it- and in the process we can make NYC more livable and efficient. All with a single the stroke of the new Mayor’s pen.

It requires no new infrastructure, no federal grants, no years-long environmental review. It just requires the city to stop giving away a fantastically valuable public asset. The revenue would be enormous and the improvement to daily life tangible for millions of New Yorkers.

Politically this would be a brilliant opportunity for the new mayor to show real leadership by pushing back against the small number of well-healed special interests (many of whom are not even NYC residents) for the benefit of the overwhelming constituency that elected him. Thanks to the City Charter, the mayor (acting via his appointed commissioner of DOT) could execute this plan unilaterally and immediately – and take full credit for the outcome. It is hard to imagine a bolder or more impactful way that he could set the tone for the rest of his administration.

Overview:

The city controls roughly three million on-street parking spots, and right now it gives almost all of them away for free. Instead, it should auction leases on every single one.

Each lessee would get the exclusive use of their spot. They’d be responsible for keeping it clean. They could sublet it. They could legally tow anyone parked there without authorization.

The market would sort out what every spot is actually worth. A prime space on West Broadway in SoHo might fetch a million dollars a year. The spot on a deserted block in Willets Point might go for a dollar. Spots in front of curb cuts come with an easement that the leasee may not obstruct access.

The benefits for drivers would be immediate and profound. No more circling around block after block hunting while hoping for a lucky parking space to open up—a ritual that, by some estimates, accounts for a staggering share of traffic in dense neighborhoods. And no more absurd alternate-side parking theater. Less congestion everywhere, because all those other drivers aren’t hunting either.

Businesses would gain predictability. A store expecting a morning delivery would know the truck can always pull up directly out front, and they could offer that same parking space to customers at other times of the day. Restaurants that want outdoor dining sheds would secure the spots through the same market as everyone else—no more opaque permitting, just a transparent price. The same goes for Amazon delivery zones and food truck staging areas.

For the occasional driver—the person who comes into the city once a month—apps would tap into a large pool of available sublease inventory, letting you reserve a spot near your destination in advance, maybe even on a recurring basis. You’d know before you left home exactly where you were going to park and know that the spot would be ready and waiting for you when you arrive. 

Implementation:

Then there would be a 30 day bidding period where people would enter their bids into a city-run auction system. 

You can bid for a single spot, or atomically bid for any set of spots. If you needed, say, 2 adjacent spots for a truck then could bid on every combination of two spots on a block.

Each bidder would need to post a 20% deposit with their bid – mutually exclusive bids do not require double deposits. So, for example, if I bid $500 for (Spot A + Spot B) or $600 for (Spot B + Spot C) then I’d only have to put up a deposit on the $600 bid since I could not win both bids.

Once the auction closes and the spots are optimally allocated. Winners have 10 days to pay the full balance of their leases. Winners can begin using their spots immediately after their payment clears. Unpaid leasees forfeit their deposits and the spots are re-auctioned.

Operations:

There would be a city-run website where lessees can generate proof-of-ownership QR codes that can be checked in real-time with any cell phone. There are also APIs so others could develop all kinds of complementary apps and services. This makes it possible to efficiently transfer or sublet spots, and makes it possible to prove with certainty a spot is currently being used with the lessee’s consent. There would also be a no-frills spot market (get it?) for facilitating subleases and sub[…]-subleases – but hopefully private businesses would jump in and provide many other ways to facilitate these transactions.

Enforcement is a private action – similar to the current system where curb cut holders can call a private tow truck to clear unauthorized users- but this is better because NYPD need not be involved since the person who calls the tow truck can independently prove that they control that spot using their QR code.

Current parking enforcement resources could be redirected to eliminating double parking which slows traffic (especially buses) and increases honking and accidents. Now that vehicles can have predictable access to street parking, there is no longer any excuse for double parking. 

Sanitation:

It is hard to appreciate just how much time is wasted and how much congestion and pollution is caused by well-meaning current alternate side of the street parking regulations- and this proposal completely eliminates them while improving curbside cleanliness they were meant to provide.

Instead, every lease holder is responsible for the condition of their spot(s) extending 18” into the roadway. This would streamline DSNY street cleaning and make it possible to clean more streets more often with fewer resources, and assign responsibility to an identifiable entity.

Enforcement follows the current sidewalk rules where inspectors can issue citations to the lessee like they currently do now for property owners. These citations are integrated into the management system so lessees get them directly and electronically. 

I would expect new businesses to quickly pop up to provide contract parking spot cleaning services to lessees. A good service could offer to pay any citation issued while they are under contract. 

Blue sky thinking: some block associations might even get together to collectively bid on a spot to place a couple of Empire Bins to get the garbage off their sidewalks and enjoy the convenience of being able to take out the trash anytime they want without needing to constantly check DSNY pick-up schedules. A boy can dream!

Q: Who would oppose this?
A: Primarily drivers who currently enjoy free parking spaces. It is easy to feel entitled to something just because you have been getting it for free up until now- even when there is no rational justification for why you should get it. But ultimately most drivers will be better off under the new system once they overcome their aversion to paying for something that was previously (and incorrectly) provided to them for free.

The private parking lot lobby will also oppose it because there would be new competition for reliable parking spaces. But ultimately many parking lot owners will figure out that using their property for more productive purposes will end up being more profitable than providing parking spots (and better for the city).

Also cops who drive to work (most of whom live outside the city, see below). 

FAQ

Q: What about parking spots on NYCHA property that are provided to residents at subsidized prices?
A: These parking spots should be included in the auction like all other publicly owned and publicly accessible spots. Residents can bid on them at market rates rather than getting a 50% discount and in practice it is not possible for a non-resident to get a spot in a desirable NYCHA parking lot even at full rate. It is iconic that the most in demand NYCHA parking spaces seem to be the ones closest to mass transit.

Q: What about parking spots currently reserved for city use like in front of police stations?
A: These parking spots should be included in the auction like all other publicly owned and publicly accessible spots. City departments that value these spots can bid on these at market rate using funds from their budget. Currently departments have incentive to claim more parking than is justified since it comes at very little cost – requiring them to budget for it will add some discipline to their parking appetites.

This is especially relevant for NYPD who have a habit of expropriating whole streets and even whole neighborhoods to use as parking lots for private employee vehicles. This free parking strongly incentivizes officers to buy cars and drive to work, and this accounts for why the majority of officers currently live outside NYC. This also contributes to an us-versus-them culture on both sides. We should instead encourage them to live in the city they serve and take transit to and from work. It is also important to avoid the “different rules” culture that letting officers park their private vehicles anywhere they want (including often on the sidewalks) perpetuates.

Q: Equity?
A: Free parking overwhelmingly subsidizes the rich since poor people are much less likely to own and drive cars in NYC. 

Q: Who would provide the technical infrastructure for the auction market and management systems?
A: Because I deeply love NYC and think this would be great for our city, I would offer to personally develop and operate both systems for the first lease cycle for $1. I have some experience with such things, but if there are any doubts on my ability to deliver then the city council could make everything contingent on me providing a working system and I’d even post a bond to fund the continuing operations.

Q: Vans and RVs?
A: Blue sky thinking: I think there is even an opportunity to instantly create housing by explicitly allowing lessees to use their spots for vans and RVs. This is current grey area, but the Mayor could issue a no-action letter staying that these RV and vans would be allowed as long as they were not a nuisance. I think we would quickly see new businesses pop up to supply powerwall-style batteries and collect waste water with “honey-wagons”. Maybe even explicitly allow Airbnbs in these vans and RVs since this would be a great fit (literally) and overcomes many of the objections of Airbnb haters about transients being disrespectful of buildings and using up permanent housing.

Q: Why not have monthly lease payments?
A: Because this gives winning bidders a cheap option at the city’s expense. Better to make the transfer of leases very low friction so that there can be private reallocation between auctions. My guess is that capital will be available for bidders who are creditworthy.

This does mean that the city will get a windfall, and it might make sense for these funds to be segregated and internally metered out to the city budget over the length of the leases.

Q: What about ____?
A: I have been thinking about this problem for a long time, but when I heard the news this morning I felt compelled to quickly one-shot this article since the time is right. I am sure there are many problems and opportunities for improvement here, but hopefully this document can be a good place to start the conversation. Comments are open for suggestions and criticisms – hopefully at the level of fundamental practicality rather than minutiae that can be worked out later once the ball starts rolling.