Not that outraged.

As per this development:

I really have no problem with the entire idea behind this.

As it stands, if you're driving downtown, you're fucked. Chances are, you're either going to spend half an hour driving around looking for a meter that's somewhat close to your destination, only to settle for something 5 blocks away. And if you're doing anything that takes a long time, you're going to have to venture back to feed your meter.

However, if you don't have the patience to circle repeatedly in search of an elusive meter spot, you're going to hit a garage or pay lot. In which care you're going to be spending far more than any of these increased meter fees will be. Raising the meter fees is punishing, in a way. Yes, if you're willing to drive down, and spend time looking for parking, and eventually find it, then you're going to be paying more to park per hour. However, if you have no problem paying for things like a parking lot, this is going to help. It will keep away people unwilling to pay that price, and allow for less competition for those coveted meter spots.

Furthermore, it encourages the use of public transit. To get downtown, people will have to use public transit more. Thus, there is reduced street congestion for both drivers and pedestrians. Less cars on the road makes mass transit more convenient, as fewer cars on the road means buses can travel faster, and taking the bus feels like less of a burden when it actually moves.

Now, if the city was smart, which it's not, it would use this money to fund more an better mass transit. Thereby increasing the ease of use, and allowing for more people to use it more often. Additionally, increased mass transit is infinitely more usable to tourists. The increased mass transit could help boost tourism, even if slightly, and thereby increase revenue.

Really, it's a pretty good idea, in the grand scheme of things. But implementation is pretty poor. Leasing out to a private company, for a long fucking time, and allocating the funds to dead-end sources (i.e. that have no capability of returning revenue, as mass transit, increased tourism, etc. can), is poor execution of a very smart policy. Overall, I think it will be a net positive for the city, but not nearly as effective as it could be.