BILL ANALYSIS Ó
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE BILL NO: ab 1298
SENATOR MARK DESAULNIER, CHAIRMAN AUTHOR: Blumenfield
VERSION: 4/7/11
Analysis by: Mark Stivers FISCAL: no
Hearing date: June 7, 2011
SUBJECT:
Impoundment for parking or leaving a vehicle for more than 72
hours
DESCRIPTION:
This bill allows a city or county to establish a minimum
distance that a vehicle must be moved to avoid impoundment after
being parked or left standing upon a highway for 72 or more
consecutive hours.
ANALYSIS:
The California Vehicle Code prohibits a local government from
enacting or enforcing any ordinance on the matters covered by
the code, such as parking, unless the Vehicle Code expressly
authorizes a local ordinance.
The Vehicle Code currently allows a peace officer, or a local
government employee engaged in directing traffic or enforcing
parking laws and regulations, acting within his or her
jurisdiction to remove (i.e., impound) a vehicle when the
vehicle is parked or left standing upon a highway for 72 or more
consecutive hours in violation of a local ordinance. The term
highway includes local streets and roads.
This bill allows a local government, by ordinance, to establish
a minimum distance that a vehicle must be moved to avoid
impoundment after being parked or left standing upon a highway
for 72 or more consecutive hours and allows for impoundment of a
vehicle that is not moved more than the established minimum
distance for 72 or more consecutive hours.
COMMENTS:
1.Purpose of the bill . According to the author, the Vehicle
Code's failure to identify a minimum distance that a vehicle
AB 1298 (BLUMENFIELD) Page 2
must be moved after parking for 72 hours allows an individual
to move his or her vehicle forward or backward as little as a
few inches in order to restart the 72-hour clock and avoid
impoundment. This defeats the intent of the law, which was to
limit long-term parking on public streets and the ability to
enforce that limitation. The author states that mobile
billboard operators and commercial advertisers who attach
their advertising trailers to motorized vehicles particularly
abuse this loophole, allowing them to remain on the streets
for months as long as the owners move the vehicles a few
inches. The intent of this bill is to close this loophole by
allowing local governments to set a minimum distance that an
owner must move a vehicle in order to allow proper enforcement
of the law.
2.Not clear what problem the bill is trying to address . In the
background materials provided to the committee, the author
mentions that commercial advertisers in particular abuse the
current lack of a distance requirement. AB 2756
(Blumenfield), Chapter 615, Statutes of 2010, authorizes local
governments to regulate, including prohibiting, mobile
billboard advertising displays. That bill defined mobile
billboards as "non-motorized" vehicles, but follow-up
legislation could expand that definition.
This bill, however, applies to all vehicles. While mobile
billboards are sometimes associated with blight, it is not
clear what problem non-commercial vehicles that are parked in
a location for more than 72 hours pose. The author may want
to clarify what problem he is trying to address. If the
problem is motorized mobile billboards, a narrower approach
may be warranted. If the problem goes beyond mobile
billboards, the committee may wish to consider the following
issues.
3.Enforcement issues . To the extent that this bill authorizes a
local ordinance to deem a vehicle continually parked if it has
been moved less than the established minimum distance, how
will an enforcement officer know whether the owner has simply
reparked the vehicle to avoid impoundment or has legitimately
used it? For example, a homeowner's car may be parked in a
similar place for most of a 72 hour period, but the homeowner
may have used the car in the meantime to go to the store or to
take children to school. If the vehicle is parked every time
within the minimum distance, the enforcement official may
think that the vehicle was moved simply to avoid impoundment
AB 1298 (BLUMENFIELD) Page 3
and could legally impound the vehicle. The committee may wish
to consider whether it is appropriate to allow impoundment of
vehicles housed in a particular location.
4.How far it too far ? This bill sets no limit on how far away a
local government could require an owner to move a vehicle.
Theoretically, the bill allows a city to impound a vehicle
that is parked anywhere within city limits for more than 72
hours. The committee may wish to consider whether some limit
on minimum distances is appropriate.
Assembly Votes:
Floor: 59-11
Trans: 11-3
POSITIONS: (Communicated to the Committee before noon on
Wednesday,
June 1, 2011)
SUPPORT: League of California Cities
OPPOSED: None received.