Greenport Village residents hoping for relief from the village’s paid parking program will likely have to wait until next year.

At a special Village Board meeting Wednesday night devoted largely to paid parking, officials said that while the board is actively exploring a resident parking permit program, there is no practical way to implement it during the current summer season because of the time needed to evaluate vendors, deploy software and comply with civil service requirements.

“For the sake of transparency with the public,” Trustee Julia Robins said during the meeting, “people should know that any kind of permits that are going to be issued — probably next year — is not going to happen this year.”

Village Administrator Jenna Esposito agreed, telling the board that implementation would take at least eight to 10 weeks even after a vendor is selected, and that the village is still evaluating competing systems.

The discussion came amid growing criticism from some residents who say year-round village taxpayers should not have to pay the same parking fees as summer visitors when parking near their homes. While board members acknowledged those concerns, Wednesday’s meeting focused primarily on how to provide resident relief without undermining one of the village’s newest revenue sources.

Revenue versus resident relief

Treasurer Adam Brautigam outlined the financial performance of the program, which began as a pilot on Front and Main streets in late August 2024 before expanding this year.

The initial pilot generated about $18,000 in revenue. During the first full summer season, paid parking produced roughly $100,000 in net revenue. Since paid parking resumed May 22, the village has collected about $65,000 this season, including more than $54,000 since the start of the current fiscal year.

Village officials continue to project approximately $165,000 in annual parking revenue.

Brautigam presented a model showing that a $40 annual resident parking permit could largely preserve that revenue while exempting qualifying residents from paying in the newer metered lots. The analysis assumes resident vehicles currently account for about 25% of paid parking activity and that roughly 65% of eligible households would purchase permits. Under that scenario, permit sales would generate about $57,000 while overall parking revenue would remain close to budget projections.

The proposed permits would apply only to village residents and would not include the metered spaces on Front Street or Main Street, which officials said are intended to maintain turnover for downtown businesses. Existing parking time limits would also remain in effect.

Competing tech under consideration

Village officials said they are evaluating two different parking management systems. One option would rely largely on physical stickers and mailed permits. The other, known as Passport, would integrate with the village’s existing ParkMobile system using license plate recognition technology, allowing permits, enforcement and future business parking passes to be managed electronically. Officials said the more sophisticated platform could also support future expansion of parking districts and other permitting programs.

Esposito said the Passport platform would also make it significantly easier to administer business permits, particularly for seasonal employers whose staff changes throughout the year.

Infrastructure

Throughout the discussion, board members repeatedly emphasized that paid parking was never intended simply as a revenue generator, but as a way to finance long-delayed infrastructure improvements without placing the entire burden on village taxpayers.

Trustee Mary Bess Phillips said residents have spent years demanding better sidewalks, roads and curbs, while rising construction costs and higher borrowing rates have made traditional financing increasingly expensive.

“We have to start thinking about, down the road, how we’re going to keep our infrastructure,” Phillips said, arguing that relying solely on taxes or borrowing is no longer sustainable.

Deputy Mayor Patrick Brennan echoed that sentiment, saying the village effectively has only three ways to pay for infrastructure: taxes, fees or borrowing.

“If we go back to only paying for this repair and maintenance of roadways through taxes, the burden is entirely shouldered by the residents,” Brennan said.

Mayor Kevin Stuessi said that the village recently spent nearly $100,000 on downtown roadway and sidewalk improvements alone, while construction costs continue to rise.

Potential expansion

Although resident permits aren’t likely before 2027, several other potential adjustments remain under discussion. Board members talked about improving parking maps and signage to make free parking areas easier to identify, reviewing time limits in certain spaces and exploring business parking passes.

Officials also discussed the possibility of eventually expanding resident permits beyond village taxpayers to include residents of the greater Greenport area, although they stressed that such a move would require additional financial analysis and likely depend on whichever parking management system is ultimately selected.

Stuessi noted that Greenport remains the only East End community that does not charge for parking at its village beaches, noting that Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Street beaches remain free to use.

RELATED: Guest opinion – Mary Bess Phillips: Why I changed my mind on paid parking

No formal action was taken Wednesday night, and the board said the discussion will continue as it evaluates parking vendors and potential changes to the program before next summer. The handful of residents who spoke at the special meeting in the village’s Little Red Schoolhouse expressed mixed reactions to the new rules.

Resident parking relief

Katherine Perry, whose husband Josh Perry has been among the most vocal advocates for resident parking relief, told trustees her family supports the concept of paid parking but believes the village failed to adequately engage residents before expanding the program. A nine year village resident who lives in an apartment above a Main St. storefront, Perry said she understands the need to generate revenue but questioned why officials implemented the expanded system before fully addressing its impact on year-round residents.

“I think one of the biggest things for me as a resident,” Perry said, “is you guys knew this conversation was coming from us residents and businesses, but you still chose to implement. I just don’t understand why the conversation wasn’t open prior to implementation.”

Village officials countered that the discussions over paid parking had been going on in public meetings for several years now. Perry said she had not been aware of earlier discussions and would have attended meetings had she known the issue was moving toward implementation. She contended that broader outreach to residents should have taken place and that a plan for resident permits should have been settled before the changes took effect.

She told the board that she lives with her husband and their 3-year-old son, who has special needs. Paying to briefly unload groceries before parking several blocks away creates challenges that go beyond inconvenience, she said, suggesting the village consider a short grace period or other accommodation while a longer-term permit program is developed.

She stressed that she and her husband support paid parking itself but believe year-round residents deserved greater consideration from the outset. “We understand why paid parking is important,” Perry said. “We understand why the village needs to make money. … But residents who commit their time to being here, choosing to live here year-round full time, should have been taken into consideration.”

Longtime resident and former Village Code Committee member John Saladino largely defended the paid parking program, arguing that the additional revenue is preferable to another substantial property tax increase. Saladino said he still remembers the pain of previous tax hikes and believes asking visitors to contribute through parking fees is a more equitable way to fund village infrastructure.

Saladino challenged complaints that downtown employees lack convenient parking, saying many of those concerns are amplified on social media and that walking a few blocks to work should not be viewed as unreasonable. He questioned whether it is the village’s responsibility to provide parking for every employee.

He also urged residents to keep the debate in perspective, pointing out that while Main and Front streets now require payment, numerous free parking options remain available on side streets and in municipal lots. Greenport, he argued, cannot simultaneously promote itself as a walkable village while insisting that parking be available immediately outside every destination.

More information about the new rules can be found here on the village’s website.