BILL ANALYSIS �
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|SENATE RULES COMMITTEE | AB 61|
|Office of Senate Floor Analyses | |
|1020 N Street, Suite 524 | |
|(916) 651-1520 Fax: (916) | |
|327-4478 | |
-----------------------------------------------------------------
THIRD READING
Bill No: AB 61
Author: Gatto (D)
Amended: As introduced
Vote: 21
SENATE TRANSPORTATION & HOUSING COMMITTEE : 11-0, 6/11/13
AYES: DeSaulnier, Gaines, Beall, Cannella, Galgiani, Hueso,
Lara, Liu, Pavley, Roth, Wyland
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 72-0, 5/16/13 - See last page for vote
SUBJECT : Inoperable parking meters and payment centers
SOURCE : Author
DIGEST : This bill prohibits, until January 1, 2017, a city or
county from citing vehicles for parking at an inoperable parking
meter or parking payment center for up to the posted time limit.
ANALYSIS : Under existing law, a city or county may establish
parking meter zones, within which the city or county may charge
for on-street parking. SB 1388 (DeSaulnier, Chapter 70,
Statutes of 2012) established a general rule that a vehicle
owner may park without penalty in any parking space for up to
the posted time limit if the parking meter or parking payment
center is inoperable but allows a city or county to opt out and
adopt a different rule if it provides adequate notice of the
rule at parking locations, parking meters, or parking payment
centers.
CONTINUED
AB 61
Page
2
This bill, until January 1, 2017, prohibits a city or county
from opting out and adopting a different rule regarding parking
at inoperable parking meters or parking payment centers. As a
result, this bill allows all vehicle owners to park without
penalty in any parking space for up to the posted time limit if
the parking meter or parking payment center is inoperable until
January 1, 2017, at which time cities and counties will again be
able to opt out and establish alternative rules.
Comments
SB 1388 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 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.
FISCAL EFFECT : Appropriation: No Fiscal Com.: No Local:
No
SUPPORT : (Verified 6/12/13)
CONTINUED
AB 61
Page
3
Atwater Village Chamber of Commerce
Automobile Club of Southern California
Consumers for Auto Reliability and Safety
National Federation of Independent Business
United Chambers of Commerce: San Fernando Valley and Region
OPPOSITION : (Verified 6/12/13)
California Public Parking Association
Cities of Sacramento and San Luis Obispo
League of California Cities
San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
ARGUMENTS IN SUPPORT : According to the author:
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
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.
ARGUMENTS IN OPPOSITION : The City of Sacramento 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
CONTINUED
AB 61
Page
4
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."
ASSEMBLY FLOOR : 72-0, 5/16/13
AYES: Achadjian, Alejo, Ammiano, Atkins, Bigelow, Bloom,
Blumenfield, Bocanegra, Bonilla, Bonta, Bradford, Brown,
Buchanan, Ian Calderon, Campos, Chau, Ch�vez, Chesbro, Conway,
Cooley, Dahle, Daly, Dickinson, Donnelly, Eggman, Fong, Fox,
Beth Gaines, Garcia, Gatto, Gomez, Gordon, Gorell, Gray,
Hagman, Hall, Harkey, Roger Hern�ndez, Jones, Jones-Sawyer,
Levine, Linder, Logue, Lowenthal, Maienschein, Mansoor,
Medina, Mitchell, Mullin, Muratsuchi, Nazarian, Nestande,
Olsen, Pan, Patterson, Perea, V. Manuel P�rez, Quirk,
Quirk-Silva, Rendon, Salas, Skinner, Ting, Torres, Wagner,
Waldron, Weber, Wieckowski, Wilk, Williams, Yamada, John A.
P�rez
NO VOTE RECORDED: Allen, Frazier, Grove, Holden, Melendez,
Morrell, Stone, Vacancy
JA:k 6/12/13 Senate Floor Analyses
SUPPORT/OPPOSITION: SEE ABOVE
**** END ****
CONTINUED