BILL ANALYSIS Ó
AB 2586
Page 1
Date of Hearing: April 4, 2016
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION
Jim Frazier, Chair
AB 2586
(Gatto) - As Introduced February 19, 2016
SUBJECT: Parking
SUMMARY: Makes changes to a variety of parking provisions.
Specifically, this bill:
1)Declares the intent of the Legislature that if a local
authority prohibits or restricts parking or standing of
vehicles for the purposes of street sweeping, the local
authority shall ensure that parking is made available as soon
as the street sweeping is completed.
2)Deletes the sunset on provisions authorizing parking, up to
the posted time limit, at inoperable parking meters or in
operable parking payment centers (with kiosks), thereby
extending these provisions indefinitely.
3)Prohibits valet parking services in business districts from
restricting motorists' ability to park in available metered
parking spaces and from prohibiting motorists from using
designated passenger loading areas.
AB 2586
Page 2
4)Prohibits a local authority, when using contracted private
parking enforcement services, from promoting incentives
(monetary or otherwise) for issuing higher numbers of
violations or increasing fines to cover the costs of the
contracted enforcement services.
5)Requires local jurisdictions to consider the feasibility of
using demand-based pricing technology and to identify
appropriate locations where it can be utilized, when
installing new parking technology within its jurisdiction.
6)Requires the local jurisdiction to include a written finding
when considering the use of demand-based pricing technology
for parking and to retain a copy of the finding and post it on
their Internet Web site.
7)Exempts the owner of a vehicle from paying a parking fine or
charges, including towing and impoundment fees, resulting from
illegal parking of a vehicle if the illegal parking is the
result of a third party criminal activity.
8)Makes related, clarifying amendments.
EXISTING LAW:
1)Defines parking as the standing of a vehicles, whether
occupied or not, otherwise than temporarily for purpose of and
while actually engaged in loading and unloading of merchandise
or passengers.
2)Allows local authorities to establish certain parking
requirements by ordinance.
AB 2586
Page 3
3)Authorizes parking, for up to the posted time limit, in any
parking space that is regulated by an inoperable parking meter
or an inoperable parking payment center, as defined, until
January 1, 2017.
4)Authorizes local jurisdictions to issue parking citations,
which includes the use of automated enforcement, to allow for
street sweeping.
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown
COMMENTS: According to the author, every year cities issue
thousands of parking tickets to motorists for every imaginable
violation ranging from parking at inoperable meters, obstructing
driveways, parking too close to fire hydrants and stop signs,
and abandoning vehicles. He notes that, in part, these actions
are driven by budget deficits that forced many local governments
to run their parking enforcement programs as revenue-generation
mechanisms rather than as a mechanism to enforce sensible
parking restrictions. He points out that these excessive
citations add up. In 2014 alone, the City of Los Angeles
generated $165 million in citations and, similarly, the City of
San Francisco generated $130 million. The author has introduced
this bill, which he describes as a "Parking Bill of Rights," to
address a variety of parking offenses that he believes are being
excessively cited by local jurisdictions and are overly
punitive.
AB 2586
Page 4
Street Sweeping: Specifically, this bill declares the intent of
the Legislature that parking should resume on a street as soon
as street sweeping is performed in an effort to free up
available parking spaces that would otherwise unusable for
"blocks of time" regardless of whether or not street sweeping
activities have concluded. The author notes not allowing
drivers to resume parking immediately after street sweeping is
concluded, unnecessarily blocks access to parking but also
causes motorists to drive around searching for parking spaces
adding to congestion and air pollution problems.
The Legislature has declared the importance of street sweeping,
particularly in more urbanized areas with higher levels of
paving, as a way to capture pollutants before they become
soluble and increase the need for costly stormwater treatment
practices. Local jurisdictions use street sweeping equipment on
a rotating basis on city streets and prohibit parking on certain
blocks (typically in four hour increments) to allow street
sweeping equipment unfettered access to curb areas where debris
and pollutants tend to collect.
It is true that limiting parking access in large time blocks
increases the demand for parking, it could be argued that these
large blocks of time allow personnel the time they need to
complete the work. Conversely, it could be argued that closing
the street to parking to simply to provide workers with more
"wiggle room" creates excessive parking difficulties for the
general public. While it makes sense that the street should be
available for parking after street sweeping is complete, it
could be difficult for motorist to know exactly when street
AB 2586
Page 5
sweeping efforts are completed.
Broken Parking Meters: This bill removes the sunset on
provisions set forth in AB 61 (Gatto), Chapter 71, Statutes of
2013, that prohibits local governments from ticketing cars
parked at broken meters until 2017. The author notes that
leaving the sunset in place will allow local jurisdictions to
simply begin ticketing again after the sunset date.
In 2012, SB 1388 (DeSaulnier), Chapter 70, Statutes of 2012,
established a general rule that a vehicle owner may park, up to
the posted time limit, without penalty, in any parking space
where the parking meter or parking payment center is inoperable.
SB 1388 contained a provision that allowed local jurisdictions
to adopt different rules, provided that adequate notice of the
rule was provided at the parking location. As a result, some
local jurisdictions began banning parking at inoperable meters
using posted signs to notify motorists, in compliance with SB
1388.
To address this loophole, Assemblymember Gatto introduced AB 61
to prohibit local jurisdictions from ticketing at inoperable
meters. AB 61 included a sunset provision making it inoperable
after January 1, 2017. The author contends that the intent of
AB 61, to make as many parking spaces available to motorists as
possible, has been achieved. He contends that AB 61 has also
created an incentive for local jurisdictions to promptly repair
or replace broken meters. Local jurisdictions, on the other
hand, contend, that AB 61, while well intended, encouraged
increased parking meter vandalism which, when successful, allows
AB 2586
Page 6
motorists to park for free. Writing in opposition to AB 2586,
the League reports that initial surveys of its member cities
indicates that there has been a significant increase in parking
meter vandalism in the two years since AB 61 went into effect.
They also note that broken parking meters represent only a
fraction of available parking meters.
Valet Parking: The author has also included in the bill a
prohibition regarding valet parking services on city streets.
Specifically, AB 2586 would prohibit valet parking operators
from blocking metered spaces and loading zones from public use.
The author notes that while these valet operators provide a
useful service to restaurants and other small businesses, he
feels that, increasingly, valet operators keep lawful motorists
from utilizing available metered spaces thereby limiting parking
options for those that do not use valet services. The author
notes that this provision addresses numerous complaints from
motorists in the Los Angeles area that valet parking services
are unfairly utilizing public parking stalls to benefit only a
small handful of businesses and individuals.
Local rules governing valet parking operators in Los Angeles
generally provide that valet parking operators must obtain
operator permits that allow operation during approved hours and
that public parking spaces may only be used with prior writing
approval. This rule presumably allows local jurisdictions to
regulate the number of metered spaces and loading zones that are
used. The issue of valet services on city streets has become
hotly contested in the Los Angeles area where some contend valet
operators are "hijacking" public spaces and others feel that
they provide a valuable service that attracts customers to
business districts.
AB 2586
Page 7
Private Parking Enforcement: The author points out that in the
face of limited manpower, many local governments have turned to
the privatization of parking enforcement operations. While the
author does not take issue with this method of performing this
much needed enforcement, he notes that some parking enforcement
contracts contain provisions that incentivize enforcement
contractors to issue citations. The author feels that these
practices results in overly harsh or unfair enforcement. While
it could be argued that these parties are simply enforcing
existing law, as the author points out, creating financial
incentives for these companies or other incentives, such as
improved prospects for renewed contracts, can lead to
overzealous enforcement resulting in costly fines to motorists
for what can be perceived as relatively minor offenses.
Demand-Based Parking Systems: The author has included in this
bill provisions that require local authorities to consider the
feasibility of using demand-based pricing when they are
considering installing new parking technology. The bill also
requires local jurisdictions to prepare a written finding before
installing demand-based pricing systems, to retain that finding,
and post it on their Internet Web site.
The author notes that demand-based pricing, which allows prices
to fluctuate based on demand, can serve as a mechanism to
increase "turnover" of parking spaces, making more parking
stalls available throughout the day. He notes that while some
cities have successfully implemented this system, many cities
fail to consider it. He feels that this bill would encourage
AB 2586
Page 8
local jurisdictions to look at and potentially implement these
parking alternatives. He point to successful demand-based
parking programs implemented by the San Francisco Metropolitan
Transportation Authority (SFMTA) who recently upgraded all of
San Francisco's 29,000 parking meters to "smart meters." These
"smart meters" allow for demand-based price changes throughout
the day. SFMTA contends that the "smart meters" improved
parking availability without increasing double parking,
congestion, or parking citations. Additionally, SFMTA noted
that "cruising" for parking spaces decreased by 30% and
meter-related parking tickets decreased 23% after the "smart
meters" were installed.
Vehicle Theft and Towing: Lastly, the author has included a
provision that would exempt vehicle owners, whose cars were
stolen or otherwise affected by criminal activity that result in
a parking citation or towing or impoundment, from being
responsible for these charges. The intent of this provision is
to protect victims of vehicle theft from the cost of citations,
towing, and impoundment charges that are incurred through no
fault of their own. While this provision would absolve the
vehicle owner of these expenses, it instead requires others,
namely towing companies who are summoned by local jurisdictions
to remove vehicles, to absorb these costs.
The California Tow Truck Association and the United Coalition
for Motor Club Safety, who both oppose this bill as a result of
this provision, point out that vehicle owners are in the best
position to readily protect themselves from the risks of
incurring costs associated with vehicle theft by obtaining a
suitable auto insurance policy. They go on to express that this
AB 2586
Page 9
provision sets an unfair precedent of requiring towing companies
to provide free towing services to local jurisdictions.
Writing in support of this bill, the Howard Jarvis Taxpayers
Association contends that AB 2586 contains a number of
common-sense provisions that will ensure that taxpayers do not
spend their hard-earned money dealing with either government
incompetence or criminal activity far outside of their control.
Suggested amendments: The majority of the provisions included
in this bill would encourage local governments to fully address
parking issues in their jurisdictions. Of the provisions in
this bill, the provision relating to stolen vehicles would place
an unfair burden on tow operators who would be required to
"absorb" these costs despite the fact that their services are
requested by the local jurisdiction. The author has agreed to
accept the Committees suggested amendment that this provision be
removed.
Double referral: This bill will be referred to the Assembly
Local Government Committee should it pass out of this committee.
Previous legislation: AB 61 (Gatto), Chapter 71, Statutes of
2013, prohibited, until January 1, 2017, a city or county from
citing vehicles or parking at in inoperable parking meter or
parking payment center for up to the posted time limit.
AB 2586
Page 10
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 adopt a different rule if it provides adequate
notice of the rule at parking locations, parking meters, or
parking payment centers.
REGISTERED SUPPORT/OPPOSITION:
Support
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association
Opposition
AB 2586
Page 11
League of California Cities
California Tow Truck Association
United Coalition for Motor Club Safety
Analysis Prepared by: Victoria Alvarez / TRANS. / (916)
319-2093