In an effort to combat growing concerns over limited parking spaces, GCSU announced phase one of its new parking plan on Wednesday, April 15. While the implemented changes were created to utilize more parking spaces, many students, faculty and staff alike were left frustrated.
“For students choosing to bring a vehicle to campus, there will be an elective fee of $50.00 per semester,” said GCSU Parking and Transportation in a campus-wide email. “The $87.00 mandatory parking and transportation fee covers parking infrastructure, lot maintenance and shuttle services.”
In addition to these changes set to go into effect on the first day of classes, Aug. 18, commuter parking permits will no longer be guaranteed to students. Instead, the permits will be issued on a lottery basis, dependent on class standing. Furthermore, the most accessible commuter parking to campus, the Liberty St. lot, will no longer be available to students.
In light of the dissatisfaction, a petition on Change.org was posted the same day as the policy announcement titled, “Demand GCSU to Retain Existing Parking Policy and Reject Lottery System.” The petition has nearly 250 signatures.
“The people in charge of parking and transportation have never been putting students’ needs in the forefront,” said one commenter on the petition. “… For a school who preaches about their care for students’ safety, why take away the safest lot from students behind public safety and make them walk long distances when some classes don’t let out until past sundown? Stop putting students at risk! Shame on GCSU Parking & Transportation Service.”
Laci Rawlins, a junior biology major, commutes 30 minutes every day to GCSU from Macon, Ga. Typically, Rawlins arrives on campus at least one hour earlier than necessary to ensure she can find a parking spot.
“As much as I love GCSU, [the recent parking changes] really made me feel some hate toward it,” Rawlins said. “It made me feel like GCSU doesn’t care that much about its students and only cares about money and staff. I still want to attend GCSU, but it does make me a lot less happy with it.”
Rawlins noted how many of her friends, who are also commuters, are already considering transferring to different institutions due to the new parking policies.
Kennesaw State University, Georgia State University and the University of Georgia, in addition to many others, all use various parking lottery systems currently to meet the growing demands of students. With increasing enrollment numbers and historical campus infrastructure inhibiting expansion, parking has become a significant challenge at many Georgia universities, not just GCSU.
On average, developers estimate parking garages can cost up to $50,00 per spot, varying in above and underground decks. With the added element of GCSU being located in the heart of Milledgeville’s historic district, a parking garage is not economically feasible at this point in time.
In addition to student disappointment, the faculty and staff’s parking permits doubled in price, now costing $240 for a year-long pass, but on a first-come, first-served basis. The North Irwin St. parking lot has been significantly underutilized, and to try and incentivize students and employees to park there, a shuttle service will be offered, but only Monday-Friday from 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
“The frustration that a lot of faculty and staff have is that a lot of us are in student-facing roles that require us sometimes to stay after work till 7 or 8 p.m.,” said an anonymous staff member. “How are we getting back to our vehicles?”
The timing of the announcement during the hectic final weeks of the semester left many in the GCSU community feeling blindsided and frustrated. If a lottery is deemed necessary at GCSU, some propose limiting it to freshmen, who are required to live on campus and tend to stay there more consistently.
For now, the policies remain unchanged and in effect for Fall 2025.
“I think students will adapt and they’ll be fine, and it actually won’t be quite as terrible as it probably feels like it’s going to be at this time,” said the anonymous staff member. “But I think that they could have done it in a way that was maybe more sensitive to people’s concerns.”