The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About11/16/2010, B3 - PARKING FINE PASS-THROUGH FOR NEW STATE SURCHARGE council M Nov. 16,2010 j acEnaa Repoin CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO FROM: Jay D. Walter, Director of Public Works9V J Prepared By: Robert Horch, Parking Se ` es Manager Q� SUBJECT: PARIQNG FINE PASS-THROUGH FOR NEW STATE SURCHARGE RECOMMENDATION Adopt a resolution to approve an increase of all City of San Luis Obispo parking fines by $3.00 to cover the additional surcharge imposed by the State of California, effective December 7, 2010. DISCUSSION On October 8, 2010 the State of California passed the Budget Act of 2010. Within the Budget Act of 2010 language were provisions that included an additional and mandatory$3.00 surcharge to be charged to all jurisdictions on all parking fines. This surcharge is in addition to the current $10.00 fee that is charged to cover existing State and County surcharges. The new surcharge takes effect 60 days after the Budget Act of 2010 was enacted. This means that all City of San Luis Obispo parking fines must be increased by December 7, 2010. If parking fines are not increased, the parking fund will be required to pay this additional surcharge to the State from existing revenues. This surcharge has a sunset provision of July 1, 2013, unless extended by another statute enacted before this date. The specific language of this new surcharge is found in Senate Bill 857 which adds section 76000.3 to the State Government Code (a) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for each parking offense where a parking penalty, fine, or forfeiture is imposed, an added penalty of three dollars ($3) shall be imposed in addition to the penalty, fine, or forfeiture set by the city, district, or other issuing agency. (b) For each infraction parking violation for which a penalty or fine is collected in the courts of the county, the county treasurer shall transmit the penalty imposed pursuant to subdivision (a) to the Treasurer for deposit in the Trial Court Trust Fund established by Section 68085. These moneys shall be taken from the penalties, fines, and forfeitures deposited with the county treasurer prior to any division pursuant to Section 1463.009 of the Penal Code. The judges of the county shall increase the bail schedule amounts as appropriate for infraction parking violations to reflect the added penalty provided for by subdivision(a). (c) In those cities, districts, or other issuing agencies which elect to accept parking penalties, and otherwise process parking violations pursuant to Article 3 (commencing with Section 40200) of.Chapter I of Division 17 of the Vehicle Code, that city, district, B3-1 Parking Fine Pass Through for new State Surcharge Page 2 or issuing agency shall collect the added penalty imposed by this section. Each agency that elects to process parking violations shall pay to the Treasurer for deposit in the Trial Court Trust Fund three dollars ($3) for each civil parking penalty collected on each violation. Those payments to the Treasurer shall be made monthly. (d) This section shall become operative 60 days after the enactment of the Budget Act of 2010. (e) This section shall become inoperative on July 1, 2013, and, as of January 1; 2014,is repealed, unless a later enacted statute, that becomes operative on or before January 1, 2014, deletes or extends the dates on which it becomes•inoperative and is repealed. Background Unlike prior surcharges, this one directly funds court operations, not construction bonds. The State was closing courts on the third Wednesday of each month due to budget constraints. This bill will increase many court fees as well as parking fines in order to keep the courts open without closures. It has been just over a year since the City of San Luis Obispo was assessed the first parking fine surcharges by the State and County. In 2009, the City Council authorized a $10 increase of all parking fines to cover both the State and County surcharges. The City's basic parking fine increased by $10; from $20 to $30, which was a 50% mark-up in parking fines. This was the largest increase to parking fines in the history of the City, and has been viewed as excessive by the public. Even with a large public education campaign this surcharge has been the source of significant complaints. With the addition of this new $3 increase, the total parking surcharges will be $13, or a 65% mark-up of the City's base fine. Table 1 below shows the individual funds and amounts that make-up the current total surcharges on City parking violations. Table 1: Parking Surcharges Surcharge Fund Name State Code Amount State Court Facilities Fund 70372(B)G.C. $1.50 State hnmediate&Critical Needs Fund 70372(B)G.C. $3.00 County Criminal Justice Facilities Fund 76000&76101 G.C. $1.50 County Courthouse Construction Fund 76000&76100 G.C. $1.50 County General Fund 76000 G.C. $2.00 DMV rounding of fractions of a dollar 9559 V.C. $0.50 Sub-Total $10.00 State Trial Court Trust Fund(Budget Act 20 10) 76000.3 G.C. $3.00 Total $13.00 In 2009-10 fiscal year, the City paid $289,500 in State and County surcharges. The new surcharge is estimated to increase this amount by$90,000 annually. The parking services that the City receives for these surcharges are miniscule. The premise of charging these parking surcharges is that it helps to pay for parking citation appeals that may be heard in the courts or to B3-2 I Parking Fine Pass Through for new State Surcharge, Page 3 pay for parking associated with court expansions. The City rarely has one of its parking appeals go to court. For example; in fiscal year 2009-10, the City had no parking appeal court hearings and only one in fiscal year 2008-09. Historically, prior to 1992, parking violations were criminal offenses and were contested in the criminal courts. Parking fine revenues were used to underwrite courthouse and jailhouse construction bonds. Significant legislation was passed in 1992 (AB 408) decriminalizing parking violations and creating a civil administrative procedure for the public to appeal. its parking violations. This new system created a three-step appeal process where the first two steps are handled by the issuing agency. Courts only hear the third level appeals now, which is a very rare occurrence. There no longer exists a nexus between the parking appeals going to the courts and the payment of parking surcharges. However, since the State took over the court administration, it has continued to look at parking violations as a source of funding. In 2009, the State passed SB 1407 which added a $4.50 surcharge on all parking violations. (With the addition of the 2010 surcharge the total State surcharge will be $7.50.) The County of San Luis Obispo followed with its own surcharges of$5.00. In addition to these fees the City also needs to round to the nearest dollar ($.50) on citations to be consistent with DMV citation processing requirements. Unfortunately this may be an on-going funding method when more funding is needed for the courts. Steps have been taken to oppose these surcharges. The City of San Luis Obispo is a member of the California Public Parking Association (CPPA) which represents over 220 public parking agencies and is actively opposing additional parking fine surcharges. Staff is working with CPPA to educate State officials of the inequity between what parking agencies pay and the lack of parking appeals in the courts. One of the reasons this new surcharge has a sunset provision of July 1, 2013 is in large part of the efforts of CPPA. CONCURRENCE Staff has informed the Downtown Association and the Chamber of Commerce about the new State and County parking surcharge. As of the date of this report, the City has not received any communication concerning this new surcharge from either group. The Downtown Association is working closely with staff to get the message out that the parking increase is not being imposed by the City, but rather by the State. FISCAL IMPACT Since this surcharge is passed onto parking fine payers, there will be no direct fiscal impact on the parking fund. However, there is likely to be additional negative perception of the fee increase. Staff will continue efforts to educate the public about the surcharge. If City Council does not approve the parking fine increase of$3.00, the Parking Fund will need to subsidize the violators at approximately$90,000 annually. B3-3 Parking Fine Pass Through for new State Surcharge Page 4 There is concern for the indirect impact on visitors downtown that interpret a fine of$33.00 ($20 fine plus $13 surcharges) as excessive and may choose to shop elsewhere. Staff will continue to work on programs that limit a customer's chance of receiving a parking violation with meter keys, options to park in a structure and other enhancement programs. Staff's objective is compliance with the parking programs, not enforcement. ALTERNATIVE Deny Surcharge Increase. The City Council could choose to deny the increase the parking fines. Although parking fine increase language is mandatory in SB 857, City Council may decide to pay the increase out of current parking fine revenues. Staff does not recommend this alternative because the Parking Fund revenues have been reduced by budget reductions and the sharing of fines with the Police Department for enforcement. The Parking Fund will be required to subsidize the violators at approximately $90,000 annually. This revenue loss may need to be shifted to other rate payers in order to fund future projects like the Palm Nipomo parking structure. ATTACHMENT Proposed Resolution and Fine Schedule \\chWre4\Team\Counci1 Agenda Reports\Public Works CAR\2010\Parking\Pkg Surcharges\CAR 2010 State Surcharge vl.doc B3-4 ATTACHMENT RESOLUTION NO. (2010 Series) A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO APPROVING THE ESTABLISHMENT OF INCREASED PARKING CITATION FINES TO COVER STATE AND COUNTY PARKING VIOLATION SURCHARGES,AND REPEALING INCONSISTENT FINES IN PRIOR RESOLUTIONS WHEREAS, State law provides, in Vehicle Code Section 40203.5, that cities establish the amount of parking penalties, fees, and surcharges for parking violations; and WHEREAS, State law authorizes the City to recover administrative fees, parking penalties, fees, and collection cost related to civil debt collection, late penalties, and other related charges; and WHEREAS, State law imposes, pursuant to Government Code Section 76000.3(c) a $3.00 surcharge on all parking violations paid to the City; and WHEREAS, State law imposes, pursuant to Government Code Section 70372(b) a $4.50 surcharge on all parking violations paid to the City; and WHEREAS, State law imposes, pursuant to Government Code Sections 76000(b), 76100, and 76101 a combined $5.00 surcharge on all parking violations paid to the City; and WHEREAS, State law, provides in Vehicle Code Section 9559, that surcharges that equal or exceed fifty cents are treated as one full dollar. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of San Luis Obispo as follows: SECTION 1. The City's current Parking Penalty Schedule is hereby repealed. SECTION 2. A new Parking Penalty Schedule reflecting an increased surcharge assessment of$13.00 per parking violation for all parking violation codes is hereby adopted as set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein. Upon motion of , seconded by and on the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: B3-5 ATTACHMENT Resolution No. (2010 Series), Page 2 The foregoing resolution was adopted this day of 2010. Mayor David F. Romero ATTEST: Elaina Cano City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: PtT�Tstine Dietrick L.,. City Attorney B3-6 i � a ATTACHMENT CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PENALTY SCHEDULE. Prior CODE&SECTION DESCRIPTION PENALTY PENALTY SLMC 10.12.050 INTERFERENCE WITH POLICE/AUTHORIZED OFFICER 90 93 SLMC 10.14.030 OBEDIENCE TO TRAFFIC CONTROL DEVICES 55 58 SLMC 10.14.090 UNAUTHORIZED PAINTING ON CURBS 55 58 SLMC 10.36.020 STOPPING OR STANDING IN PARKWAYS PROHIBITED 30 33 SLMC 10.36.030 STOP/STAND/PARK IN VIOLATION OF CHAPTER 30 33 SLMC 10.36.040 NO PARKING ZONE-PROHIBITED PARKING-Also Taxi Zone(d) 50 53 SLMC 10.36.050 USE OF STREETS FOR STORAGE OF VEHICLES PROHIBITED 20 23 SLMC 10.36.070 REPAIRING OR GREASING VEHICLE ON PUBLIC STREET 20 23 SLMC 10.36.080 WASHING OR POLISHING VEHICLES 20 23 SLMC 10.36.090 PARKING ADJACENT TO SCHOOLS 20 23 SLMC 10.36.100 PARKING PROHIBITED ON NARROW STREETS 20 23 SLMC 10.36.110 PARKING ON GRADES 20 23 SLMC 10.36.120 UNLAWFUL PARKING-PEDDLERS,VENDORS 20 23 SLMC 10.36.130 EMERGENCY PARKING SIGNS 20 23 SLMC 10.36.140 LARGEICOMMERCIAL VEHICLE PARKING NEAR INTERSECTION 20 23 SLMC 10.36.150 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF LARGE VEHICLES 20 23 SLMC 10.36.160 NIGHTTIME PARKING OF VEH W/OPERATING AIRIREFRIGERATION 20 23 SLMC 10.36.200 PARKING IN A RESIDENTIAL PERMIT PARKING AREA 35 38 SLMC 10.36.230 PERMITS-DISPLAY OF PERMITS 20 23 SLMC 10.36.233 PARKING IN YARD 45 48 SLMC 10.36.235 NO PERMIT LOT 25 28 SLMC 10.40.010 TIMED PARKING 10 MINUTES TO 10 HOURS 30 33 SLMC 10.40.020 BACKING INTO PARKING SPACE PROHIBITED 25 28 SLMC 10.40.040 PARKING PARALLEL ON ONE-WAY STREETS 18 21 SLMC 10.40.050 DIAGONAL PARKING 18 21 SLMC 10.40.060 PARKING SPACE MARKINGS 30 33 SLMC 10.40.070 NO STOPPING ZONE 18 21 SLMC 10.40.080 ALL NIGHT PARKING PROHIBITED(3-5am) 35 38 SLMC 10.44.020 CURB MARKING TO INDICATE NO STOPPING/PARKING REGS. 20 23 SLMC 10.44.030 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN YELLOW ZONE 50 53 SLMC 10.44.040 EFFECT OF PERMISSION TO LOAD/UNLOAD IN WHITE ZONE 30 33 SLMC 10.44.050 STANDING IN ANY ALLEY 30 33 SLMC 10.44.070 HANDICAPPED PARKING 285 288 SLMC 10.48.010 CERTAIN VEHICLES PROHIBITED IN CENTRAL DISTRICT 55 58 SLMC 10.48.020 ADVERTISING VEHICLES 30 33 SLMC 10.48.030 ANIMAL DRAWN VEHICLES 30 33 SLMC 10.48.040 TRUCK ROUTES 85 88 SLMC 10.48.050 COMM.VEHICLES PROHIBITED FROM USING CERTAIN STREETS 85 88 SLMC 10.48.060 MAX.GROSS WT. LIMITS OF VEHICLES ON CERTAIN STREETS 85 88 SLMC 10.52.040 PARKING METERS-OPERATIONAL PROCEDURES 20 23 SLMC 10.52.050 UNLAWFUL TO PARK AFTER METER TIME HAS EXPIRED 30 33 SLMC 10.52.060 UNLAWFUL TO EXTEND TIME BEYOND LIMIT 12 15 SLMC 10.52.070 IMPROPER USE OF METER 12 15 SLMC 10.52.080 PARKING METERS/STANDARDS-PROPER USE 12 15 SLMC 10.52.110 MOTORCYCLE SPACES 12 15 CVC 5204(a) CURRENT TAB IMPROPERLY ATTACHED 86 89 CVC 21113(a) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-MOVING 113 116 CVC 21113(b) VEHICLE OR ANIMAL ON PUBLIC GROUNDS-PARKING 30 33 CVC 21113(c) DRIVEWAYS, PATHS, PARKING FACILITIES ON GROUNDS 30 33 CVC 22500.1 STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: FIRE LANE 113 116 CVC 22500(a) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: WITHIN INTERSECTION 30 33 CVC 22500(b) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON A CROSSWALK 30 33 Page 1 B3-7 ATTACH `_ :: CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO PENALTY SCHEDULE Prior CODE$SECTION DESCRIPTION PENALTY PENALTY CVC 22500(c) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: BETWEEN SAFETY ZONE 30 33 CVC 22500(d) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: W/IN 15' FIREHOUSE ENTRANCE 30 33 CVC 22500(e) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: PUBLIC/PRIVATE DRIVEWAY 30 33 CVC 22500(f STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON SIDEWALK 30 33 CVC 22500(g) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ALONG/OPPOSITE OBSTRUCT 30 33 CVC 22500(h) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: ON ROADWAY SIDE OF VEHICLE 30 33 CVC 22500(i) IMPROPER PARKING IN BUS ZONE 260 263 CVC 225000) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: IN TUBE OR TUNNEL 30 33 CVC 22500(k) STOPPING/STANDING/PARKING: UPON BRIDGE EXCEPT AUTH 30 33 CVC 22500(1) IMPROPER PARKING IN WHEELCHAIR ACCESS 260 263' CVC 22502(a) CURB PARKING 30 33 CVC 22502(b) PARKING OPPOSITE.DIRECTION OF TRAFFIC 30 33 CVC 22502(c) CURB PARKING-WHEELS MORE THAN 18 INCHES FROM CURB 30,' 33 CVC 22504(a) UNINCORPORATED AREA PARKING 30 33 CVC 22505(a) PARKING ON STATE HIGHWAY WHERE SIGN POSTED 30 33 CVC 22505(b) POSTED NO PARKING-STATE HIGHWAY 30 33 CVC 22507 UNLAWFUL PARKING 30 33 CVC 22507.8(a) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED 285 288 CVC 22507.8(b) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-OBSTRUCT/BLOCK 285 288 CVC 22507.8(c)(1) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-ON LINES MARKED 285 288 CVC 22507.8(c)(2) PARKING IN SPACE FOR HANDICAPPED-PARKING LOT 285 288 CVC 22510 PARKING IN SNOW REMOVAL AREAS 30 33 CVC 22511.7 HANDICAP ZONE 285 288 CVC 22512 VEHICLE UNATTENDED 113 116 CVC 22513 TOW CARS-PARKING ON FREEWAY 30 33 CVC 22514 FIRE HYDRANTS 60 63 CVC 22515(a) UNATTENDED VEHICLES-SET BRAKES/STOP MOTOR 30 33 CVC 22515(b) UNATTENDED VEHICLES-SET BRAKES/WHEELS/PREVENT MOVE 30 33 CVC 22516 LOCKED VEHICLE 113 116 CVC 22517 OPENING AND CLOSING DOORS 113 116 CVC 22520.5 VENDING ON FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY 113 116 CVC 22520.5(a) VENDING ON FREEWAY RIGHT-OF-WAY 113 116 CVC 22521 ILLEGAL TO PARK ON RAILROAD TRACKS 30 33 CVC 22522 PARKING NEAR SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMPS 285 288 CVC 22523(a) VEHICLE ABANDONMENT-On Highway 280 283 CVC 22523(b) VEHICLE ABANDONMENT 280 283 CVC 22650 UNLAWFUL REMOVAL OF UNATTENDED VEHICLE 113 116 CVC 22651(b) VEHICLE PARKED/LEFT STANDING TO OBSTRUCT TRAFFIC 113 116 LATE PAYMENT PENALTY 30 Page 2 B3-8 I � RED FILE From: eron betan[SMTP:ERON@IMPULSE.NET] MEETING AGENDA Sent: Sunday, November 14, 2010 7:51:58 AM To: Council, SloCity DATE lb ITEM #„0 Subject: Parking Fine increase Auto forwarded by a Rule Eron Betan Lucky Lulu's hard e ' ems' 691 Higuera Street, SLO 93401 000UNCTL 0CDD DIR a CITY MGR a FIT OM a ASUCM a FIRECDIEF LULU LUXE a ATTORNEY o PWDIR a CL MMRIG a PO=CHW 864 Higuera Street, SLO 93401 a Plg aPARKS&RECDIR o TRIBUTE a UTEL DTR November 14 o NEWTDOS c ERDM a SLOCITYNM aCOUNCL. a CI7y MGR Parking Fine Increase aCURK To the City Council, Please do not increase the parking fines. These fines are all ready too high and for that matter so is the cost of the meters. I own two retail shops on Higuera Street, Lucky Lulu's and Lulu Luxe. Both stores sell women's clothing. The city of San Luis Obispo should be helping downtown business. Raising parking tickets is not helping. AND It is too easy to get a ticket in DOWNTOWN SLO. A $33 ticket represents over four hours of work at $10 an hour after taxes. That is a sting that customers do not forget, especially when they have free parking at FOREVER 21. And yes the opening of FOREVER 21 has devastated my numbers. Many people in our county will not come downtown because of the parking hassle. The city of Santa Barbara has no meters and incredible parking lots.. AND SIGNS ON EVERY CORNER DIRECTING TRAFFIC TO THESE LOTS! ! ! What we have is an abundance of Meter maids handing out tickets too often and sometimes they are even rude. What we have is meters that give you 12 minutes for a quarter. That makes no sense. 15 minutes for a quarter is right. Why can we not be a friendly city? What we have is our centrally located beautiful tree shaded parking lots being turned into corporate competition, while the city makes money off these developments. I must ask, ARE YOU RUNNING YOUR OWN BUSINESS? CUT THE METER RATES RECEIVED LOWER THE PARKING FINES NOV 15 2010 SLO CITY CLERK DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF METER MAIDS PUT UP SIGNS TO DIRECT CARS TO THE EXISTING PARKING STRUCTURES PLEASE! ! ! I would come to the Tuesday meeting but alas I must go on a planned buying trip for the holidays. I do my part to bring business to downtown, to cater to customer's needs, to take care of my staff, to stay viable, to run a good friendly business. . SO PLEASE DO YOUR PART AS THE GOVERNMENT OF THIS CITY. I implore you do not raise the parking fines anymore, Sincerely, Eron Betan Sincerely Name: margaret wheeler Address: 980 Wigeon Way RECEIVED City: Arroyo Grande State: CA NOV 16 2010 zip: 93420 Phone: Fax: SLO CITY CLERK email—from: mswheels47@yahoo.com Message: Dear Council Members, With the new proposed increase in parking ticket fees you are again asking citizens to shop out of town! hard co email: G COUNCIL o CDD DIR a C[fYMGR C PITDIR RED FILE ° AMCM °FIRE CHIEF v ATTORNEY c PW DIR c CLERKMr, o POLICE CMU MEETING AGENDA o PES c PARRSRRECDIR O TRIBUNE O U ILDIR //% DATE LviTEM # �J ° NE� 0HRDIR O SWCITYNEWS O COUNCIL o CITYMOR o CLERK