BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 61
Page 1
Date of Hearing: May 8, 2013
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON LOCAL GOVERNMENT
K.H. "Katcho" Achadjian, Chair
AB 61 (Gatto) - As Introduced: January 7, 2013
SUBJECT : Parking: parking meters.
SUMMARY : Prohibits, until January 1, 2017, a local authority,
by ordinance or resolution, from prohibiting or restricting the
parking of vehicles in a space that is regulated by an
inoperable parking meter or inoperable parking payment center,
and makes conforming and technical changes.
EXISTING LAW :
1)Allows local authorities to establish parking meter zones and
to fix the parking fee for such zones by ordinance.
2)Allows, except as provided below, a vehicle to park, for up to
the posted time limit, in any parking space that is subject to
an inoperable parking meter or an inoperable parking payment
center.
3)Allows local authorities, by ordinance or resolution, to
prohibit or restrict the parking of vehicles at inoperable
parking meters or inoperable parking payment centers.
4)Provides that no ordinance or resolution adopted by a local
authority pursuant to the above provision shall become
effective until signs or markings giving adequate notice of
the restriction or prohibition on parking have been placed at
parking locations, parking meters, or parking payment centers.
5)Defines "inoperable parking meter" to mean a meter located
next to and designated for an individual parking space, which
has become inoperable and cannot accept payment in any form or
cannot register that a payment in any form has been made.
6)Defines "inoperable parking payment center" to mean an
electronic parking meter or pay station serving one or more
parking spaces that is closest to the space where a person has
parked and that cannot accept payment in any form, cannot
register that a payment in any form has been made, or cannot
issue a receipt that is required to be displayed in a
AB 61
Page 2
conspicuous location on or in the vehicle.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS :
1)This bill prohibits local authorities from adopting ordinances
or resolutions that prohibit or restrict parking in a space
regulated by an inoperable parking meter or inoperable parking
payment center. This prohibition would be in effect until
January 1, 2017. This bill is sponsored by the author.
2)SB 1388 (DeSaulnier), Chapter 70, Statutes of 2012,
established a general rule that a vehicle owner may park
without penalty in any parking space where the parking meter
or parking payment center is inoperable for up to the posted
time limit, but allowed a city or a county to adopt a
different rule if it provides adequate notice of the rule at
the parking locations, or the parking meter or payment kiosk.
In response to SB 1388, the League of California Cities
surveyed its members on their practices and reported the
following results: many small cities do not have parking
meters at all; in cities that do have meters, some ticket for
parking at a broken meter, and some do not; and, among cities
that ticket at a broken meter, most will dismiss the ticket
unless there is some kind of pattern that indicates mischief.
3)According to the author's office, "Last year, the California
Legislature unanimously passed SB 1388 (DeSaulnier), which
allowed parking at spaces controlled by inoperable parking
meters or pay stations for up to the maximum posted time limit
if no local ordinance had been adopted to prohibit it. Though
the law was intended to provide relief to motorists who found
themselves ticketed through no fault of their own due to a
broken meter, some cities have taken advantage of a loophole
in the law that allows local governments to continue to ban
parking in these spaces so long as there are signs posted to
alert the public.
"In wake of last year's measure, the City of Los Angeles
recently passed an ordinance that took advantage of this
loophole and upheld the city's policy of ticketing drivers who
park in spaces with broken parking meters. A recent
investigation by the NBC affiliate in Los Angeles found more
AB 61
Page 3
than 17,000 parking tickets were issued in a single year for
meters that were reported as malfunctioning in Los Angeles
alone, costing motorists untold amounts in fines for
circumstances beyond their control."
4)While current law generally allows motorists to park at an
inoperable meter or kiosk, it also allows local jurisdictions
the flexibility to adopt their own policies, so long as
adequate notice is provided to the public via signs or
markings at the parking location. This bill departs from this
policy for a three-year period, after which current law would
resume unless the sunset is extended or removed.
5)According to a July 5, 2012, article in the Los Angeles Times,
the City of Los Angeles issues 2.5 million parking citations
every year. Last year, the city increased fines for the sixth
time in seven years, which is expected to generate an extra
$8.4 million for the city's general fund. An editorial
published on February 15, 2013, in the Los Angeles Times urged
local action on the issue, noting the adverse impact of the
fines on low-income individuals and those who live in
neighborhoods with scant street or garage parking. The
editorial reported that parking tickets generate $150 million
in annual revenues for the city.
The February 15 editorial also noted irregularities with the
private company, Xerox State and Local Solutions, that
operates the city's Parking Violations Bureau, stating, "Since
Xerox took over, a group of people in the city says the
company has been trying to keep more parking revenue by
stonewalling attempts to fight tickets?(one individual) filed
a class-action lawsuit in January, claiming Xerox doesn't
really consider their cases but just sends form letters
stating that their appeals have been rejected. Then, when
motorists try to appeal to the Department of Transportation,
Xerox slaps them with late payment fees and penalties.
"The city's data on tickets seem to back up (the class-action
litigant's) claim that Xerox is rejecting too many appeals.
Last year, the city dismissed thousands of tickets after Xerox
had rejected the drivers' appeal - vindicating the small
percentage of intrepid souls who managed to bring their case
to City Hall."
6)The Automobile Club of Southern California, in support, states
AB 61
Page 4
that "several cities, including Los Angeles, have adopted
ordinances prohibiting the parking at inoperable parking
meters. This can hurt businesses, which rely on those spaces
being available to their customers. It also hurts motorists
that rely on metered parking and seems contrary to the purpose
of metered parking, which is to reasonably allocate a scarce
resource (parking) so that it benefits many users. We also
note that the newer multi-payment method meters evidently
break less often and report problems electronically to the
city, which should allow city officials to quickly fix them.
Finally, we think it is in the best financial interests of the
city to fix meters quickly. A prohibition on parking does not
further any of these goals."
Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety, in support, also
note that cities "may have a perverse incentive not to repair
(meters and payment centers) in a timely fashion, as they may
collect more for parking tickets than for parking fees."
7)The City of Sacramento, in opposition, states that
"jurisdictions across the state have enacted ordinances
related to parking meters, and many are specific to broken
parking meters. Last year, cities were pleased to work with
the author and sponsors of SB 1388?to clarify that drivers are
allowed to park at a broken parking meter unless a local
ordinance provides a different policy. In order to avoid
additional confusion, cities agreed to post any local
ordinance that prohibits or restricts parking at a broken
meter.
"Cities use parking meters to facilitate parking management,
promote local businesses, and reduce congestion and pollution.
But meters can be a magnet for vandalism. Several cities
reported problems with intentionally jamming parking meters in
high traffic areas, demonstrating a need for enough
flexibility in the statewide policy to address local problems.
Unlike AB 61, SB 1388 struck an appropriate balance between a
statewide policy and local control. There is no demonstrated
need to reverse the agreement made just a year ago."
8)Support arguments : Supporters argue that this measure
protects individuals from cities and counties that are
overzealous and unfair in their parking enforcement.
Opposition arguments : Opponents argue that this bill follows
AB 61
Page 5
too closely on legislation specifically allowing local
jurisdictions to adopt their own policies governing parking at
broken or inoperative meters or pay stations, and that these
decisions should remain in the hands of local government
decision makers.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION :
Support
Atwater Village Chamber of Commerce
Automobile Club of Southern California
Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety
Opposition
California Public Parking Association
City of Sacramento
City of San Luis Obispo
Analysis Prepared by : Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958