Stop Paid Parking in City-Owned Lots

Stop Paid Parking in City-Owned Lots

Recent signers:
Joan Arpin and 19 others have signed recently.

The Issue

Petition Statement:

We, the undersigned residents and community members, are calling on the City Council to reject the proposal to implement paid parking in city-owned lots, including the parking lot off Third Street that the community uses to access Centennial Park and other nearby public spaces.

City-owned parking is public infrastructure. It is funded by taxpayers, maintained with public dollars, and exists for one clear purpose: to provide free and equal access to public spaces for everyone. Turning these lots into paid parking fundamentally changes that purpose and creates an unnecessary barrier between residents and their own community.

The parking lot off Third Street is not just a convenience—it is a primary access point to Centennial Park, where families gather, children play, events are held, and residents come together. Adding a parking fee to access this area would discourage participation and place a financial barrier on everyday community life.

This proposal is often justified as a way to generate revenue, but relying on paid parking in public lots as a funding source is a short-sighted and ineffective approach. Using access to public space as a revenue tool is not sound long-term planning, and the idea that it is needed “just for revenue” is not a strong enough reason to limit access to public property.

This policy will not affect everyone equally. It will disproportionately impact families, seniors, working residents, and local taxpayers who already contribute to the funding and upkeep of these facilities. Charging additional fees to use public property amounts to a form of double payment for basic access.

Beyond the financial impact, this policy would change how people experience their own community. When residents have to consider cost before visiting public spaces, attending events, or using city facilities, participation declines. Over time, that weakens community engagement and reduces overall public use of shared spaces.

There are also concerns about fairness and trust. Public spaces should remain open and accessible without financial barriers. Once cities begin charging for access to basic public infrastructure, it sets a precedent that public property is no longer truly public in practice.

We are not opposed to responsible management of city resources. However, we are firmly opposed to turning public access into a paid privilege.

For these reasons, we respectfully urge the City Council to reject the implementation of paid parking in all city-owned lots, including the Third Street lot used to access Centennial Park, and to preserve these spaces as free, open, and accessible to the entire community.

We the undersigned call for:

No paid parking in city-owned lots
Protection of free access via the Third Street Centennial Park parking lot

1,193

Recent signers:
Joan Arpin and 19 others have signed recently.

The Issue

Petition Statement:

We, the undersigned residents and community members, are calling on the City Council to reject the proposal to implement paid parking in city-owned lots, including the parking lot off Third Street that the community uses to access Centennial Park and other nearby public spaces.

City-owned parking is public infrastructure. It is funded by taxpayers, maintained with public dollars, and exists for one clear purpose: to provide free and equal access to public spaces for everyone. Turning these lots into paid parking fundamentally changes that purpose and creates an unnecessary barrier between residents and their own community.

The parking lot off Third Street is not just a convenience—it is a primary access point to Centennial Park, where families gather, children play, events are held, and residents come together. Adding a parking fee to access this area would discourage participation and place a financial barrier on everyday community life.

This proposal is often justified as a way to generate revenue, but relying on paid parking in public lots as a funding source is a short-sighted and ineffective approach. Using access to public space as a revenue tool is not sound long-term planning, and the idea that it is needed “just for revenue” is not a strong enough reason to limit access to public property.

This policy will not affect everyone equally. It will disproportionately impact families, seniors, working residents, and local taxpayers who already contribute to the funding and upkeep of these facilities. Charging additional fees to use public property amounts to a form of double payment for basic access.

Beyond the financial impact, this policy would change how people experience their own community. When residents have to consider cost before visiting public spaces, attending events, or using city facilities, participation declines. Over time, that weakens community engagement and reduces overall public use of shared spaces.

There are also concerns about fairness and trust. Public spaces should remain open and accessible without financial barriers. Once cities begin charging for access to basic public infrastructure, it sets a precedent that public property is no longer truly public in practice.

We are not opposed to responsible management of city resources. However, we are firmly opposed to turning public access into a paid privilege.

For these reasons, we respectfully urge the City Council to reject the implementation of paid parking in all city-owned lots, including the Third Street lot used to access Centennial Park, and to preserve these spaces as free, open, and accessible to the entire community.

We the undersigned call for:

No paid parking in city-owned lots
Protection of free access via the Third Street Centennial Park parking lot

The Decision Makers

Cañon City Council
6 Members
2 Responded
Kathy Worthington
Cañon City Council - District 2
I appreciate you reaching out and being involved! The one item regarding the paid parking is —it’s not a done deal! The motion was for further analysis of the paid parking to get as many real facts on the revenue vs the cost to manage the lots. The analysis will likely include potential free parking for x number of hours, or free parking for residents, etc. A decision would also have to be made as to where the revenue would go, general fund or other worthy city project. From my perspective, unless I’m presented with a strong analysis that benefits not only the city but the people parking, I’m not in favor. And, I don’t expect an analysis that will sway my thinking. Every member of council takes their responsibility seriously and tries to do what’s best for the benefit of the city and its residents. I encourage all 333 signees [number of signatures at time or response] to come to the council meetings or listen online. That’s the best way to get the information. Kathy Worthington District 2 Cañon City City Council [Note: The Change.org Civic Engagement Team reaches out to decision makers to let them know about petitions in their community and to help facilitate engagement with supporters. The above was an email response we received regarding this petition.]
Gerald Meloni
Cañon City Council - At Large
For clarification, I am proposing that all Fremont County residents be eligible for a parking pass at no cost. Downtown parking is not part of this discussion or an option. That was discussed on Monday night. A city must be managed much like a business. This summer’s drought could have a significant impact on city revenues, which help fund essential services such as public safety, parks, and other community needs. We cannot assume that current conditions will remain unchanged indefinitely. We cannot assume the second largest contributor to our economy, tourism, will remain unchanged and/or grow . Like all municipalities, our city must continually evaluate potential revenue sources to ensure it can provide the services residents expect. City-owned paid parking is not a new concept; most of us encounter it when visiting other communities. There is still considerable exploration and analysis required before determining whether paid parking is appropriate and, if so, what the best solution would be for our community. Many Colorado tourist communities have found ways to charge visitors for premium parking while protecting residents through free permits or parking credits. The goal isn’t to charge locals—it’s to create a sustainable revenue source from visitor demand that helps pay for city services and amenities. Thank you for your attention. Gerald Meloni At Large Council Member, Cañon City [Note: The Change.org Civic Engagement Team reaches out to decision makers to let them know about petitions in their community and to help facilitate engagement with supporters. The above was an email response we received regarding this petition.]
Jeremy Reeves
Cañon City Council - District 1
Phil Lund
Cañon City Mayor

Supporter Voices

Petition Updates

Share this petition

Petition created on June 2, 2026