New Transportation and Parking five-year plan addresses some housekeeper demands

Last month, a group of UNC housekeepers and students climbed the steps of South Building to deliver a petition to the University, demanding parking fees be abolished for employees making less than $50,000 a year. 

An updated five-year plan by the UNC Transportation and Parking department will be presented to the UNC Board of Trustees in May. The plan proposes changes to UNC's parking permit structure in an attempt to address the housekeeper's demands. 

The department worked alongside the Advisory Committee on Transportation and Parking as well as consulting firm Kimley-Horn to develop the five-year plan. During a February ACT meeting, UNC Transportation and Parking executive director Cheryl Stout said the proposed plan made “amazing achievements” in pricing structure and equity changes.

One of the proposed changes impacts the permit pricing structure. Currently, permit prices are divided in four tiers, or “bands,” starting from salaries below $32,000 to salaries above $100,000. The proposed plan will expand these bands from four to 10 tiers, lowering the parking costs for some employees.

The plan also eliminates the pricing difference between gated and non-gated permit prices. According to UNC Media Relations, the difference in prices was especially difficult for lower-salary employees who parked in a gated facility.

Keith Hines, vice chair of the UNC Employee Forum and a former member of ACT, said that though the five-year plan acknowledges the concerns of housekeepers, it does not fully address them.

“The parking plan does not give housekeepers what they're asking for,” Hines said. “So in that sense, it does not abolish parking fees for anyone making less than $50,000, which is the ask they had.”  

Robin Lee, the president of the UNC Housekeepers Union, said the changes proposed under the five-year plan are insufficient. She said even if permit fees are decreased through the proposed plan, in the upcoming years they may be increased again due to salary raises. 

“That’s not what we want. We want free parking, period,” Lee said. “It doesn't make any sense for us to work here and have to pay to come to work.”

Lee has worked for the state of North Carolina for 20 years and at UNC since 2019. She said she has had difficulty paying for parking and that the money taken out of housekeepers' paychecks for parking could be used for higher wages. 

Hines said the development of the five-year plan was an “arduous,” year-long process. The advisory committee included representatives from both the undergraduate and graduate and professional student government, UNC athletics, UNC hospitals and more groups from across campus. 

In his time as a member of ACT, Hines' main purpose was to advocate for the needs of UNC staff, he said, and parking is “always” a topic of discussion for the Employee Forum. Hines said he and Employee Forum chair Katie Musgrove used the information they had collected from community meetings and town halls to discuss disparities within the parking permit structure. 

“We wanted to, as much as possible, find some relief for the most vulnerable of our staff and just try to make conditions and living better for the staff,” Hines said.   

He said within the committee, he and Musgrove fought to abolish parking fees for UNC staff who make $50,000 or less. However, he said they did not win that fight.

“We did manage to get a lower pricing point,” Hines said. “And I know that people will still not be happy with that, and I respect that.”

Media Relations said in a statement that parking permit fees are necessary to support the construction, operations and maintenance of the parking facilities. Employees are the largest users of the parking system, the statement said.  

Hines said because the Transportation and Parking department is completely receipt-supported and uses its revenue for the maintenance of parking structures, the complete abolishment of parking fees for employees making less than $50,000 did not seem feasible or sustainable. 

“It will be something that the Employee Forum always looks at and always keeps in mind,” Hines said. “Because if we have the chance to make things better for people, that's what we're going to do. That's what we're going to shoot for.” 

@dailytarheel | university@dailytarheel.com