The Parking Signage Hezitorial
YONKERS, NY — March 6, 2019 — A ticket was placed on the windshield of a resident who parked his car on Glenwood Avenue at the corner of North Broadway. The resident challenged the alleged infraction because the sign was inappropriately posted; it did not then and is even now, not facing traffic as it must to conform to posting of traffic signs. Exacerbating the issue is the fact that the sign is posted too high on the pole, that is 10-12 feet above ground level. When recognizing that Glenwood faces downhill, the sign may best be described as inconspicuous and worse, cannot be readily discerned at night. It seems the resident parked his car equidistant alongside the pole; the front end of his car facing downhill, and the backend facing toward North Broadway. Were one to have noticed the sign, the sign was posted incorrectly, an aberration counter to every other sign posted on the block, and deficient in meeting the standard demanded by law.
The resident followed protocol, conforming to the process, attended a hearing before a Parking Violations Adjudication Bureau Judge armed with photographic proof, akin to some posted herein, of the signage incorrectly posted and the reasonably deduced conclusion that the sign in question does not conform to standards in place long before this issue ever came to trial. The Yonkers Parking Violations Bureau Adjudication Bureau Judge summarily dismissed the photographs presented in evidence as not persuasive. The Adjudication Bureau Judge’s inability to admit the incongruity of the sign posted for not being in compliance with standards and protocol throughout New York State reveals the temerity of his decision and questions his capacity as an Adjudication Bureau Judge. One would have to be legally blind not to recognize that this one sign is posted incorrectly, in juxtaposition to all other signs on the street. Since the Judge is not blind, the only possible conclusion is that he was somehow deflected by other concerns rather than focusing on the evidence presented to him. It must be emphasized that it was this one sign on that street that was posted incorrectly.
Euthimios Theotokatos, a/k/a ET, director of Consituent Services responded to the resident. ET wrote, “I spoke with Parking Violations and we believe (*1) that they followed their process in this situation (*2) and there is nothing that leads us to believe that anything was done incorrectly. (*3) With-that-said, we would advise that you follow through with the appeals process if you believe the Judge’s decision was wrong and/or you have any additional evidence or proof to support your defense.
“Hope this information helps.
“Please let me know if you have any additional questions or concerns.
(*1) The process followed was dismissive of evidence presented and is defined herein blatantly; that being the case, how can ET assert they followed their process. Does that suggest that “their process” is acceptable despite being applied imprudently?
(*2) How can ET even suggest that there is “nothing that leads us to believe that anything was done incorrectly”, when it is evident that the sign was incorrectly posted. Is ET legally blind? Is that his excuse? Or that the response expected from a “get along to get along sycophant who parrots a debased system?
(*3) It is interesting to find ET issuing a demeaning admonition to the resident to “follow through with the appeals process,” as if the resident is unaware to follow through on the appeals process
It must further be noted that the appeal process demands that the fine be paid regardless of whether it was exacted thoughtfully since the evidence submitted was nonchalantly dismissed. in addition to the fine imposed, there is a $10 charge to launch an appeal which requires one to go to the Parking Violations Bureaus to get and fill out a form. A respectful courtesy would have been to send the resident an appeal form. ET did not consider such a response. How sad! How ignorant.
At issue is why an appeal form is not available to be filled out and filed electronically? Yonkers City Hall vis-a-vis Constituent Services and the Parking Violations Bureau have collectively admitted their lack of concern to serve the public interest. Is that because they can collectively be so draconian or is it because they do not know any better, or because they so choose to reveal their demeanor? The outcome of such debauchery of systems in place speak to an appeals process in name only and to which an astute public is aware of the incongruity of their mistreatment.
ET uses standards of “double speak” that have been honed on Madison Avenue, elevated to the state of disbelief by political entities that continue to deceive its citizenry. They do so by parroting a system where each failing in process and expected rational remedy continues to be marginalized to kiss the powers that be while exacting an unwarranted penalty fee to which they should not be held responsible.
The logical remedy is to repost the sign so it conforms to New York State codes and standards; send a letter of apology to the resident, give notice on the city website asking for residents to advise where such aberrations exist, should they be aware of them; and give the stressed and overburdened Parking Violations Adjudication Bureau Judge a few extra days off at his own expense. His conduct speaks to his need a few days respite. This is the way people, respectful of and to the people they are intended to serve, do their job.
# # #
Editor’s Note: My apology to those whose issues and concerns have taken a back seat to the demands of every day, and week. I am way behind. I am focused more than ever to reveal such concerns. I know they matter and so do you. If you know something, advise the Yonkers Tribune. Direct email to Hezi Aris, Yonkers Tribune Publisher / Editor-at-Large Hezi Aris: eHezi@hush.com. Your identity is respected and shared with no one.