I want to express my strong opposition to the proposed budget cuts to the RydeFreeRT program. This program is not just a convenience but a vital service that ensures our children can get to school safely and reliably. It removes barriers to education by providing free transportation, which is especially crucial for low-income families.
Eliminating this program would disproportionately affect those who rely on public transit the most. As a mom with a child who will enter kindergarten soon I worry about the accessibility of my daughter's commute to school.
We need to invest in our children’s future by maintaining this essential service. Cutting the RydeFreeRT program would be a step backward, undermining our commitment to accessible education for all. RydeFreeRT has shown tangible benefits, such as improved school attendance and reduced financial strain on families.
Please consider the long-term impact on our community. Thank you.
Although I was and remain deeply grateful for the efforts being made to address our family’s plight (see the attached PDF “2024.5.20-21 Emails related to fee hikes #175 & #176”), which started with the Mayor's appreciated gesture in his memo of May 17, 2024 (part of the supplemental materials for this council meeting, published by the city that same day), we will not know whether the outcome of these efforts will suffice until the hearing on June 25, after passage of a hopefully amended version of the FY 24/25 budget before you.
For this reason, and others, I continue to implore the council to reject the two dramatic and inequitable home occupation fee hikes (#175/#176) in that budget, at tonight’s City Council meeting. $234 and $5,265 fees are still completely out of reach for many, if not most, aspiring home business owners, when over 43% of them make $10,000 or less in annual gross receipts and when they are often less likely to succeed at obtaining outside business financing because they are more likely than other small business owners to be women, racial and ethnic minorities and members of other historically disadvantaged groups, as explained in my May 6, 2024 letter (also attached as PDF “2024.5.6LetterReProposedFeeIncreases(TClark)”). To clarify, the $234 would be required of all brand new home businesses, before they’ve made even a penny, and the $5,265 fee would be required by any of those who need any exceptions to the rules, including our family without the two additional essential edits to the home occupation code, which, again, we will not know the fate of until June 25, after passage of a hopefully amended version of the FY 24/25 budget now before you.
As I have explained in previous correspondence, I am currently out of state and so will not be able to attend tonight’s City Council meeting. However, I hope and trust that my unavoidable absence at tonight’s meeting will not affect your determination to stand for equity and fairness alongside the smallest of small businesses, by rejecting these two fee hikes.
Thank you for your consideration.
Warmly,
Tiffany Clark (she/her)
Attorney at Law
Law Office of Tiffany Clark
I want to express my strong opposition to the proposed budget cuts to the RydeFreeRT program. This program is not just a convenience but a vital service that ensures our children can get to school safely and reliably. It removes barriers to education by providing free transportation, which is especially crucial for low-income families.
Eliminating this program would disproportionately affect those who rely on public transit the most. As a mom with a child who will enter kindergarten soon I worry about the accessibility of my daughter's commute to school.
We need to invest in our children’s future by maintaining this essential service. Cutting the RydeFreeRT program would be a step backward, undermining our commitment to accessible education for all. RydeFreeRT has shown tangible benefits, such as improved school attendance and reduced financial strain on families.
Please consider the long-term impact on our community. Thank you.
Dear Mayor Steinberg, Councilmembers and Staff,
Although I was and remain deeply grateful for the efforts being made to address our family’s plight (see the attached PDF “2024.5.20-21 Emails related to fee hikes #175 & #176”), which started with the Mayor's appreciated gesture in his memo of May 17, 2024 (part of the supplemental materials for this council meeting, published by the city that same day), we will not know whether the outcome of these efforts will suffice until the hearing on June 25, after passage of a hopefully amended version of the FY 24/25 budget before you.
For this reason, and others, I continue to implore the council to reject the two dramatic and inequitable home occupation fee hikes (#175/#176) in that budget, at tonight’s City Council meeting. $234 and $5,265 fees are still completely out of reach for many, if not most, aspiring home business owners, when over 43% of them make $10,000 or less in annual gross receipts and when they are often less likely to succeed at obtaining outside business financing because they are more likely than other small business owners to be women, racial and ethnic minorities and members of other historically disadvantaged groups, as explained in my May 6, 2024 letter (also attached as PDF “2024.5.6LetterReProposedFeeIncreases(TClark)”). To clarify, the $234 would be required of all brand new home businesses, before they’ve made even a penny, and the $5,265 fee would be required by any of those who need any exceptions to the rules, including our family without the two additional essential edits to the home occupation code, which, again, we will not know the fate of until June 25, after passage of a hopefully amended version of the FY 24/25 budget now before you.
As I have explained in previous correspondence, I am currently out of state and so will not be able to attend tonight’s City Council meeting. However, I hope and trust that my unavoidable absence at tonight’s meeting will not affect your determination to stand for equity and fairness alongside the smallest of small businesses, by rejecting these two fee hikes.
Thank you for your consideration.
Warmly,
Tiffany Clark (she/her)
Attorney at Law
Law Office of Tiffany Clark