BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 61
Page 1
ASSEMBLY THIRD READING
AB 61 (Gatto)
As Introduced January 7, 2013
Majority vote
LOCAL GOVERNMENT 8-0
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Ayes:|Achadjian, Levine, Alejo, | | |
| |Bradford, Gordon, | | |
| |Melendez, Mullin, Rendon | | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
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.
AB 61
Page 2
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
conspicuous location on or in the vehicle.
FISCAL EFFECT : None
COMMENTS : 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.
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.
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.
AB 61
Page 3
"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
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."
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.
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.
AB 61
Page 4
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."
The Automobile Club of Southern California, in support, states
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."
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."
AB 61
Page 5
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
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.
Analysis Prepared by : Angela Mapp / L. GOV. / (916) 319-3958
FN: 0000477