Permit prices for faculty and staff are expected to increase from $357 to $426 — nearly a $70 difference. Parking in the commuter lot is expected to rise from $71 to $85 and lots 75, 83 and 91 near Brody Hall South and East complexes will cost $170 — $27 more than it currently costs. Lot 25, near Owen Hall, and Lot 65, in Brody Complex, will also see an increase from $214 to $256.

Meter rates and parking violation fines are expected to remain the same.

It’s no wonder why more people don’t park in the ramps and lots on campus — they’re just too expensive. Yet the MSU police parking division wants to continue building new parking structures when the current lots and ramps aren’t fully occupied.

Give us a break. A 19 percent increase on parking permits is excessive. If the parking division is seeking to raise the wages of employees who take care of the parking structures, the inflation might be understandable; but 19 percent might be more than is needed for things such as maintenance. Some of the parking ramps and lots are fairly new — like the Trowbridge Road and Shaw Lane ramps — so it’s hard to believe that the permit increase is for maintenance purposes.

The idea that students will have to pay $256 for parking in lots within Brody Complex is absurd, especially when some drivers can rarely find parking spaces near their buildings. Pricing for the commuter lot also seems unreasonable since students have to purchase a parking permit as well as a bus pass. When you add up those costs, students could be paying about $118 for a parking spot in the commuter lot.

The construction project on Farm Lane, which makes the lot even less appealing, should warrant a price reduction if anything.

It’s also shocking to know that even the people who keep this campus functioning have to pay to park. Free parking should be one of the perks faculty and staff members of the university receive, yet they have to suffer the wrath of inflation just as students do.

People might not be so against the idea of a price increase if they were allowed more flexibility with the parking permits. When drivers purchase a permit, they are limited to only the ramp or lot they purchase it for. If there was just one flat rate for parking permits allowing drivers to park in any lot or parking structure, maybe people would be more willing to buy a permit.

Tailoring the parking permit towards a students’ major might also prompt people to buy permits. For example, if students with classes in the Communication Arts and Sciences Building had an opportunity to buy parking permits for the Trowbridge Ramp ahead of other students, they might be more inclined to purchase one.

Jacking up the price of parking permits is not necessary to maintain and upgrade the conditions of parking structures and lots. Building new parking ramps won’t do any good if the prices of the permits steer drivers away from purchasing them.