PT's Parking Blog

The "other" problem with Credit Cards

If you are a city, a college/university, a hospital or any other large organization, you may find that the parking credit card account piggybacks on a large "general" account run by the larger entity.  This is done primarily since the credit card companies offer lower rates to larger customers. Makes sense.

However does it make sense for you?  I have been hearing problems about municipal parking operations that take credit cards, but the money goes directly into the city's general fund. So the parking operation gets no credit for that money.What if a charge is returned? How does the master account holder figure out who to bill?

Most private operators have sub merchant accounts for every garage so the credit card charge can be tracked back to where it originated. Many public sector organizations don't.

I know it seems pretty obvious, but I'm being told that many organizations simply don't track the funds. In one case, the parking manager told me that he simply billed his university accounting department for the amount of credit card charges they had every month and the money was credited to the parking account. When I asked how they knew if it was the right amount he simply said "They never asked."

Just something to keep in mind.

JVH

Crawfordsville IN, to Drop Parking Meters

I saw this a few seeks ago and blurred over it but an avid reader sent it to me with the following comment:

Think there might be a bigger reason than the parking meters for not going donwtown?

I did a bit of research and think my correspondent may be correct.  Crawfordsville is a small town about a half hour plus drive from Indianapolis. They are charging 10 cents and hour for parking on street.I'm sure it costs more than that to collect the 10 cents.  People don't come downtown because of a 10 cent charge?  I doubt it very much. Even Widow Dolph on her fixed income can afford a dime, probably even a quarter. My guess is that downtown Crawfordsville needs some reason for people to come down there.

OK, they have the CVS and the Walgreens, plus probably a  grocery store or two ad a couple of banks, but most of them have parking, off street. The people who need the onstreet parking, the small shops, jewelers, coffee houses, bars, and the like have their employees parking on street and taking up the parking. After all, at $16 a month, why not? 

I wonder if there is a Wal-Mart or a supermarket out on the edge of town with the usual supporting shops and restaurants. If so, downtown may be suffering from the fact that its simply easier and better to go to the Wal-Mart than come downtown.

The plan is to take out the meters and keep the 2 hour maximum parking limit. But how will they enforce that, they aren't enforcing it now with the meters. Without the meters it will be license to steal parking in downtown Crawfordsville.

The merchants need to get together and invest in revitalizing downtown. They have a new drug store and library, how bout some sidewalk cafes, a weekly festival, a strolling musician or two? Crawfordsville might be just the right distance from Indianapolis for people to drive out in the evening for a nice dinner, or a stroll down memory lane. Who knows?

If you build it, they will come....

My humble suggestion is that the city fathers begin a bit of micromanaging and raise the parking fees to 50 cents a hour in two steps, first to a quarter and then in a year to 50 cents.  They should also begin a strong enforcement program, and ensure that all the folks who work downtown don't park on the streets that are metered. Any monies that are generated can go into the programs for downtown.

They need a PR program to let locals park without using meters (they can have in car meters, permits, or whatever.)  Many may like the idea of having an in car meter.  It looks like they may have lost some metered spaces (probably from a lot they sold to CVS or Wallgreens.) 

They should then revisit the problem in a year and see if 50 cents is enough (or too much) to keep about 15 % of their on street spaces open. 

Someone took a tour of surrounding towns and found they removed their meters. But did anyone ask how parking was, and how the business people liked the new program of "free" parking?  Probably not. 

As you see in the entries below, most cities remove parking charges at their peril. It was a disaster in Brooklyn. Could be a problem in Indiana.

JVH

How do cities collect past due Parking Fees?

Baltimore city has hired a Texas firm to help collect past due parking fines. You can read all about it here.  The only issue I have is that I know of certainly half a dozen, maybe more, companies that assist cities in collecting parking fines, and this company isn't on my list. That doesn't mean they won't do a good job. They may be aces at this. According to their web site, they focus on hospitals, back taxes, but parking isn't stressed.

I only bring this up, because as we all know, parking is a contentious issue in cities at best, and a disaster at worst. The way fines are collected and the attitude of the collectors is extremely important. As one of my friends, say, "It must be turned from an enforcement transaction to a simple business transaction."

Also, the concept of getting people to pay is a city wide issue that needs to have finance, enforcement, public works, law enforcement, legal, the merchants and citizens in the community, the city council and mayor as well as public relations all working in tandem to change to paradigm and get people to understand the need for fines, the need to follow the rules, in fact even the need for those rules.

Simply hiring a collection agency may collect some of the past due fines, but it seldom makes the problem go away.

If I were a business and had a significant past due problem (ie people not paying their bills), I would not only look at them, but I would look at myself and try to find out what I'm doing wrong. I think cities need to do that, too. There are major issues, a big one being simply that the people move around so much in city government that people responsible for one thing this year, have moved on next year. Programs aren't look at as city wide problems, but department problems.

I'm sure the law firm of Linebarger Goggan Blair and Sampson do a fine job.  They handle parking ticket collections in Miami, Chicago, Houston, and Dallas, as well as Baltimore. Its just that I think the problem is bigger than sending notices, making phone calls, and impounding someone's car.

JVH

Parking "Hell"

I just love it when folks get what they want and then it turns and bites them right on the rear.  Here's to a shopping area in Brooklyn. They got their streets refurbished, their parking meters removed, and their business in the dumper. Read about it here.

OK, they didn't ask for the meters to be removed. The city did that as part of the refurbishment. I guess they probably will be replaced, some day. In the mean time, the merchants are screaming bloody murder. It seems that you can't really enforce parking limits without meters. You know, a charge.

Their business is down, most likely because when the meters were removed, all their employees started parking on the street in front of their shops, taking the spaces used by customers. The customers, not finding space to park, space, by the way they had been and were more than willing to pay for, went to places where parking was plentiful, and probably costly.

These stories simply underscore the need for charging market rates for on street parking to maintain the resource and to make sure that the people that want to park have a place to park. Simple? Yep.

JVH

Parking Rangers

OK, let's get into some detail here.  If we are going to fix the poor reputation we have with the community we have to do it on the front lines. The Parking Enforcement Officers need to have some flexibility so when a husband is dropping of his critically ill wife in a no parking zone, he can get a pass.  But I think it should go further than that.

I believe that the enforcement officers should be able to change a ticket to a warning at any point in the process, even after its written. If a person walks up just as the officer is placing the ticket on the car, the officer should be able to convert that ticket to a warning.

The major argument against this is that it could  be fraught with graft. That is, if a ticket is worth $40, the driver could give the officer $20 to "fix it" on the spot. Also, sometimes a little cleavage or a well turned ankle could do the same.

It seems to me that its a price worth paying.  If a person has parked for two hours and 15 minutes in a two hour zone, they should get a warning the first offense. The city could track it and on the second or third time, turn the third and future ones into legitimate tickets. That would take care of the habitual scofflaw. The once a year "I'm 10 minutes over" guy would get a pass.

Also, simple statistics could handle the officers who where taking backhanders. Although I don't see why there would be a backhander. If a person walked up when the ticket was being written, it would be voided. No bribe needed. If the ticket was voided half an hour after it was written, then that's another matter and could be dealt with administratively.

With proper publicity and signage, the plan could work. Scofflaws would get their tickets, honest citizens would get warnings and would do better next time, and that great resource known as parking would have tenders (enforcement officers) whose job it was to make parking safe, and plentiful.

Of course there is a stumbling block. There would be a decrease in revenue generated by parking fines. The city would have to come to terms with the fact that parking fines were and enforcement tool and not another way to taxing the citizenry. Monies generated from parking should be used for improvements in the area where the parking was located. New sidewalks, curbs, lighting, flowers, parks, etc etc etc. Maybe even more police patrols. It should not be a way for the city council to balance the general fund.

Rather than be "Parking Nazis", the enforcement staff would become welcome members of the community. They would provide a service, and at the same time provide a public relations bonanza.

Whatcha think?

JVH

In fact, here's a prime example. In Manchester NH a citizen asked what I think is a legitimate question. They asked to see the ordinance they were violating. The conversation escalated and what could have been a plus for the city, ended in cuts and bruises and a possible law suit. 

If the officer had simply said "Gee, Mr Jones, I don't have the ordinance on me, but I'm only giving you a warning, and if you like you can discuss it with the supervisor down at the city hall. Or give them a call, or check the ordinance on line. In any event, there's no charge."  Or he could have just punched him out.

Damn I'm good!!!`

Remember my post a few weeks ago about Handicapped enforcement in North Carolina and that I suggested they hire handicapped people to enforce the law. Read it here. Well, it seems that at least one city has already done just that.

Capitola, CA, according to the Contra Costa Times, has three parking enforcement officers in wheel chairs. They write half a million dollars a year in tickets. It also seems that their wheel chairs don't sheild them from abuse from the local citizenry.

People have thrown pizza at them and spit on the ground in front of their wheelchairs. They've also been called names like "Nazi police."

"You've got to have thick skin to be in this job," said Ben Irao, one of the enforcers. "We try to take a diplomatic approach to everything, but it doesn't always work out that way."

"Some people think we should be sitting at home and collecting welfare," Humberto Morales said. "They do a double-take when they see us, like, 'Are you for real?"'

So, read PT Blog and get the facts, even when I don't know what the facts are. This just seems reasonable. These folks certainly are capable, hard working, and have a built in thick skin. They not only write tickets for meter and over stay violations, but also keep a very sharp eye out for Handicap Placard violations.

I still think, however, that they should be given the power to give "warnings." Check the post above.

JVH

It Must be that Summer Blues - Cell Phones

There's some parking "stuff" to blog about, but I'm going to comment now on those folks that use their cell phones in public places and speak at the top of their lungs.

OK, I admit it, I do answer my cell in public places, but when I do, I whisper into the phone. The people on the other end don't even notice. but it ensures that I don't raise my voice 10 db when I answer the call.

I was at breakfast this morning and the fellow behind me was talking quietly to whomever was joining him for his meal. About ten minutes after I arrived he answer a call and his voice became "booming." People were turning around all over the place looking at him. He talked on the phone for 15 minutes my by watch, and then hung up. He returned to the quiet voice he used before the call.

What was I to do? I really didn't want to confront the guy, but frankly I was upset....But I got an idea. When I got back to the office, I printed up some business card sized notices that said:

CELL PHONE USER

I'm sure you don't realize it, but when you talk on your cell phone, you raise your voice at least twice as loud as you do when you talk without the phone. It is very intrusive to all the folks around you who really don't want to intrude on your privacy.
I might suggest that you "whisper" when you answer the phone. It is designed to work very well with soft voices. If your caller can't hear you, they will let you know and you can adjust.

Thanks

I'm going to hand these cards to folks I hear using cell phones in high voices.  In the supermarket, at the theater (sigh) and in restaurants. 

Ok, I'm not stupid. I'm going to hand it to them and walk away before they have a chance to read it.

Let's see if this works. 

JVH

"Employee Free Choice Act" -- It just isn't that at all

With an Orwellian name, the "Employee Free Choice Act" has passed the House almost directly down party lines. The heart of the act is to change the law to allow unions to organize without a secret ballot. This concept of "card check" organizing is anathema to freedom. The name of the bill is HR800.

It works like this. The union comes in and calls a meeting of the employees. They talk about the benefits of the union and all and then pass out cards to everyone at the meeting. The employees are then asked to fill out the cards and sign them to indicate their intention to join the union. Group pressure is certainly a part of the event.  In other words professional union organizers are standing there pushing while people make decisions. AND they know who signs up and who doesn't. 

For years the law has said that a secret ballot is required. This is a change to give unions a "leg up" and make it easier to for them to organize a shop. It's not appropriate, not fair, and puts employees in a position of being dammed either way. 

According to Marty Stein at the NPA, the bill has gone down to defeat in the Senate. This is good news. Read about it here.  The NPA mounted a campaign of letter writing and joined with major industry groups opposing the bill. Good news. 

JVH

Dogs vs Cats --

This has nothing to do with parking, but I think its appropriate to consider something other than our profession from time to time.  I have both dogs and cats and love them equally, however have to side with Jonah Goldberg at the National review on this one.  To get the entire debate, go to the "corner" blog at National review.

Cats V. Dogs: The Eternal Debate 

Okay, I know that Kathryn and Rich don't like long debates about cats and dogs around here, partly out of some bourgeois nod to professionalism and the weightier issues of the day and partly out of their own deep biases against man's best friend. Nevertheless, Mr. Hood's post  from last night needs to be responded to (Apolitical observation indeed!). His argument seems to be encapsulated in this article. A few scattershot points.

1.Let's stipulate for the sake of argument that it is true that cats were of some utility to humans as guards of granaries and the like. Perhaps they were even more useful than dogs in some crass utilitarian sense ("greater practical value" in the coldly calculating words of Mr. Hood) in the days before dog breeding was perfected to make dogs vastly more efficient and enthusiastic vermin-slayers than cats. But, it must be noted that cats, as opposed to dogs, care not a whit about actually helping humans. They are useful in the way guard geese, canaries in coal mines, and sharks with fricking lasers on their heads are useful — as unwitting accomplices in human progress (or villainy). Dogs meanwhile, are our allies and comrades in the eternal struggle to muddle through this mortal coil (as I argued here).   

Hood opines: "Dogs may be friendlier, but cats have been more useful." Uh huh, Mr. Hood. And pray tell Mr. Hood: Who, exactly, would you prefer to have in your foxhole? The noble hound or the mercenary-yet-languid cat? Do you sleep better (no doubt having nodded-off reading Jack London's exciting tales of man and cat alone in the wilderness) knowing your cat has watchful eyes on the neighborhood or because your vigilant canine is on the job? How many blind people do you see walking the streets with their seeing-eye cats? Does your heart palpitate when you see drug-sniffing cats at the airport? For surely, your sobriety is in doubt for you to say such things.

2. By way of illustration: Dogs have been allies in war for thousands of years. For a relevant example:

Dogs have served in the U.S. military during every modern war—World War I, World War II, Korea, Vietnam, the Gulf War, in Bosnia, and in Afghanistan—as trackers, scouts, sentries, and messengers; as attack dogs, mine detection dogs, and rescue dogs.

The dogs are credited with saving thousands of American lives and great acts of heroism. Some military analysts estimate as many as 10,000 U.S. and allied lives were saved during the Vietnam War alone. But although there are several small memorials around the country dedicated to dogs that served in the military, there is no national memorial honoring their service.

Cats, meanwhile, have a less sterling record of combat: 

The earliest examples of cats being used in warfare dates back to the Ancient Egypt during a war against Persia. The Persians, fully aware of the reverence that Egyptians paid to their felines, rounded up as many cats as they could find and set them loose on the battlefield. When the Egyptians were faced with either harming the cats or surrendering, they chose the latter...

The most creative way to use a cat as a weapon happened in World War II. The United States’ OSS (Office of Strategic Services, the precursor of the CIA) needed a way to guide bombs to sink German ships. Somebody hit upon the inspiration that since cats have such a strong disdain of getting wet and always land on their feet that if you attached a cat to a bomb and drop it in the vicinity of a ship, the cat’s instinct to avoid the water would force it to guide the bomb to the enemy’s deck. It is unclear how the cat was supposed to actually guide a bomb attached to it as it fell from the sky but the plan never got past the testing stages since the cats had a bad habit of becoming unconscious mid-drop.

Not to be outdone by its predecessor, the CIA also attempted to use cats but this time as a bugging device during the Cold War. Although a disaster as a guided bomb, the CIA thought that a cat would make the perfect covert listening device in a project known as Operation Acoustic Kitty. They attempted to surgically alter the cat by placing a bugging device inside him and running an antenna through its tail. The project took five years and $15 million dollars before the first field test hit a slight snag when the bugged kitty was released near a Russian compound in Washington and was immediately hit by a car while crossing the street. The project was ended soon after.

3. While not quite a myth, it is something of an exaggeration that cats are extremely competent or useful ratters. Once sated on the flesh of vermin, the typical cat takes little to no interest in dispatching any more rodents, preferring instead to spend the remainder of the day digesting in the warm sun. Dogs, meanwhile, are some of the greatest ratters in the world. The terrier in particular can mount enormous numbers of kills, all to please his master, not his belly.

An example close to home: my father-in-law once bought a supposedly champion cat to get rid of mice in his supermarket. Very soon, the cat had chosen to empty the seafood case instead. This was around the same time my in-law's family dog, Snowball, physically prevented my father-in-law from pulling the Lincoln town car out of the garage for fear the car might hit one of the kids playing in the driveway. Snowball put his body between the car and the girl and stood his ground saying to the metallic beast: Ye shall not pass. The lesson was lost on no one.

So There...

JVH

The "Old Gray Lady" and Congestion Pricing and Green Technology

Thomas Friedman, a columnist with the NY Times, has sallied forth into the crowded territory of those in favor of congestion pricing. He is doing it because it's "Green," and "Technology Based." If you want to pay for it, you can read his article in the Times.

Generally he says that the concept is good because high tech companies like IBM are going to make millions on the technology required to track folks in and out of congestion areas.  They now do it in Stockholm, and before long, all the cities in the world with use congestion pricing and many companies like IBM will provide the technology to ensure that you pay to drive to downtown Duluth, or Chicago, or LA, or Houston.

And of course, since fewer people are diving, all will be right with the world.

Balderdash!!!

As I have said earlier, this is just another scheme to collect a tax on folks who work, live, or shop in cities. They already collect a sales tax, property tax, inventory tax, tax on parking, and Lord knows how many other taxes, why not one more?

Sure, they put in congestion charges in London and Stockholm and traffic went down 20%. But did congestion go down, too?  They are screaming in London about increased congestion in certain areas, because cars are trying to stay out of the congestion pricing areas, but are trying to get close. A local newspaper checked the average speed of traffic in certain areas (within the congestion zone) like the famous strand and found that it was slower now than a year ago.  Remember those "laws of unintended consequences."  London is expanding the congestion pricing areas, and guess what? The underground is jammed, buses are overloaded. And neighborhoods surrounding the downtown core of the capital are being overwhelmed by cars. Well Duh!!!

It seems that people still have to get to work, somehow. They have to drive part way and then take public transportation. Of course there has to be public transportation. Public transportation that gets to where your office happens to be. Would this work in LA? How bout Houston? Phoenix? San Diego? Dallas? Miami? Oh, well. that's OK -- we are going to do it because, according to Friedman, its "Green" and "good for good old American Technology" cuz after all IBM developed the software and hardware to track you and charge you. Other companies will spring up making more gizmos to track you in and out of cities. That will be good old high tech non smokestack technology, and voila global warming is dead and original sin has been vanquished.

Also, consider this:  How many people do you think will not be driving in to Manhattan if you charge em $8 for the trip. They are already paying $50 to park, $75 for lunch, $350 for a hotel room,  and are getting paid high salaries to work in Wall Street and Madison Avenue. What's another $160 a month?

Oh. but what about the folks who don't make that kind of money. I say they don't drive now.

Has there ever been a solution, put forth by government, that has worked? Name one. How bout the Post Office, or DMV, or IRS, or welfare, or even public education? Every one has its problems and they are getting worse and worse.  But then, maybe this congestion pricing scheme will work.

Why not trying this little solution:  Let the free market set the prices for parking downtown. That includes the thousands of on street spaces that charge a tenth of what off street parking costs. If New York City set the prices of on street spaces at say $5 or $7 an hour, my guess is that people would quickly decide to park off street if they were staying 8 hours (and at $45 a day save $11 bucks) and stop the congestion they are causing by driving round and round the block to find a cheaper space. Those that wish could pay the $7 and hour and park on the street. There would always be a few spaces available for them because of the rate set. If $7 wasn't enough, raise it until there were a few spaces left all the time.

Congestion would go down, (That's the goal, right?) income into the city coffers would go up (that's the REAL goal of the bureaucrats downtown), people would have a place to park who wanted it, and those that didn't want to pay the higher parking prices, could take the bus (that's the goal, isn't it?)

No new bureaucracy, no multi million dollar purchase of high tech gear, no new set of law breakers and enforcement folks to run them down.

Just change a few signs, and you are off into the sunset.  And the companies that sell the already existing green technology (read that Pay and Display/space, pay by cell phone, pay by in car meter, pay by GPS, pay by well...) will thrive and prosper.

I'm sure that's much too simple for the "green/technology" based Mr. Friedman. There is no political backhanders going on in the state capitol, no money coming in from Washington, no intrigue, and certainly no feeling of having done something GREAT for the environment.

Nope -- just a quick, easy, simple solution that actually has the same end result without all the hassle in between and will work NOW.

However, Mayor Bloomberg, and Arnie, and the Governor of Florida have attached their wagons to the green movement and know that this is a political move that's a winner. I wonder if the fact that there is half a billion in Federal congestion pricing pilot grant funding hanging out there has been the slightest motivation for these politicians who seem so happy to jam this concept down the throats of the people who live, work, and make their livings in our central cities.

Oh, I almost forgot. Why not take the half a billion and use it for planning for nuclear power. The real culprit for C02 emissions is coal fired power plants. If we could take that pollution out of the air, world wide, the problem, I think, would go away, assuming we could lace all the cow's feed with Beano.

Just my opinion, and since I don't write for the august New York Times I'm certain few give a damn.

UPDATE:

Word is that the New York State Assembly has turned down the measure and that Mayor Bloomberg has acknowledged that Congestion charges will not be a fact in New York City. I was rather surprised with his lack of graciousness, but then, he is a very rich politician, after all

 

JVH

Not enough parking space -- Citizens take matters into their own hands

San Francisco has a derth of parking -- particularly in its residential areas. The reasons are many, but primarily they are related to history (garages changed into apartments) and the fact that the city has limited the number of spaces a developer can build with new apartments and condos to 1 for every 4 units. Now that makes perfect sense.

The city can project what the parking requirements will be years into the future. An apartment built next to a BART station or next to a 1000 car garage might need fewer spaces than one built in the heart of Signal Hill or other of Baghdad by the Bay's crowded neighborhoods. Once again, why not let the developer make those decisions, not the city.

Of course the city wants to keep the number of spaces down, so its residents will sell off their cars and walk or take a cable car or whatever. But shouldn't the residents be able to make that decision on their own?

Well, SF residents are going to. They are putting a proposal on the November ballot that will allow developers to increase the number of spaces they provide when they build new projects.

Let the free market decide. There will be a few bumps along the way, but the market will set the proper number of spaces for each development. Always does.

Shoupistas Rule!!!

JVH

Vespas, Scooters, and Parking

First, there's a story about a fellow in Seattle who is upset because someone moved his Vespa and parked in the space. I agree, that folks should keep their friggin hands off other people's property. However I notice that most cycles, particularly the lighter ones, are chained to something when they are parked. In the same article a woman said she paid to park her scooter at a meter and then had it moved to a unpaid meter. Where was her lock and chain?

All that having been said, I note that in some cities, scooters and cycles park for free. I can see where they should pay less, certainly, but free, nope.  I wonder if the fellow in Seattle paid for the parking space (the article doesn't say but I doubt it.

I also note that he is parking in a space "between cars." Now that's fine with me, but I wonder if the guy who tried to get his car "out" liked it when he found the Vespa wedged in the space.

Scooter and motorcycle owners have great advantages. They can park in places where most can't, they can drive around obstructions and weave in and out through traffic. But I think they should also pay for the right to park. When and if they do, they have a strong complaint. Until then, it is just someone being impolite and moving someone else's property. 

JVH

Well why not?

The Bay Area Rapid Transit District in San Francisco is planning to allow people to park in some of their lots and take the BART to SFO. Seems reasonable to me. However there is a problem, Houston...The cost. Or is there>

See, if you park and pay $6 a day for the privilege and then pay $8.50 to ride the train, (round trip) you are paying $2.50 extra for the first day. (It costs $12 to park in the long term lots at SFO). So you have to stay at least two days to break even. BUT>>>

If you have a family of four, you are paying $34 for the train fare. You will have to be away at least five days to break even. AND its certainly more convenient to drive your herd to the airport than move them from parking to train, to train to the airport. 

My guess is that this policy would be great for Joe businessman or woman who is off for a three or four day road trip. They will save some money, and avoid the congestion around the airport.

Its a pilot program, but why not?  If BART has the space go for it. 

Oh, they do note in the article that they are eventually going to hire a private operator to run the program and pay them $1 a day per car. So far so good. However they are projecting 100 cars per each of five locations. That's $500 a day in income for the operator, assuming they are full. Would they have to put a person at each site?  If so, that $500 goes away pretty fast.

JVH

OK - Got it...$225,000 a space

I saw this article in the NY Times a few days ago and thought I would comment on it some time. In the past two days I have received no less than 10 emails about it.

These folks paid $165,000 for a 10x15 space in New York, and a developer has unbundled parking in his new condo building on Manhattan, selling the spaces for $225,000. Everyone seems all agog that a parking space will sell for that. Frankly, I have heard of them selling in London, Chicago and in New York for twice that.

But that's not the point. Finally someone can buy a condo without paying for the parking space under it they may never use. Many people in New York, or London, for that matter, don't own cars. They are superfluous. So why have to pay for the parking under the building. In this case, the developer was allowed by code to only build 5 spaces in his 34 unit building, so he is selling them to those who want them.

This is nothing new, but will continue, and should. If you own a car, you should pay for all its expenses, including the cost to park it. That's true for on street as well as off street parking. If covered secure parking in NYC goes for $225,000 and you amortize that over 30 years, the cost is about $675 a month ($625 plus a $50 condo fee). What should it cost to park on street?  $150?  $250?  $300?  If you were guaranteed a space within a block of your building and could zip in and out at will, isn't that of value?

JVH

The Operator Responds -- Lost Tickets in Florida

A few weeks ago I commented on a audit and lost ticket problem at Florida Southwest Airport in Fort Meyers.  I got all my information from the local paper who was quoting the auditor and local bureaucrats.  You can read the blog entry here.

I received a call from the VP for airports for the operator who said "wait a minute, there's another side to the story."  He says that the problem was two malfunctioning ticket dispensers and that although they put the entry time and date on the tickets, the ticket number and other information wasn't written on the mag stripe. So the tickets had to be entered into exit cashier terminals manually. They showed up physically, but not in reports. The 12,000 tickets weren't missing, just not listed on the reports. When they discovered the problem, they audited every ticket and although there were a minimal number missing, certainly not the number noted in the audit.  This is an operator taking responsibility, finding a problem and fixing it. He wrote:

We did not know there was a malfunction of the ticket dispensers until cars started to return and could not be read by the validator. As you can imagine the majority began showing up several days after the malfunction (the nature of the parking duration) and thus the reason for the large quantity.  

As it relates to the auditors, the tickets that were issued were identified in software but unreadable because they were improperly encoded. The nature of the software is as such that those tickets can not be physically removed by the operator from the software count. The problem is that the only way to remove the ticket from software is for the ticket to read the mag stripe. Therefore because the tickets were not readable and had to be manually entered, they were not removed from software.  As such those tickets remain in the software and look as though they are unaccounted for. The real issue is that there needs to be procedures to clear tickets that are issued by the system but are unreadable by the system.
 
The real story here is that the software had no way of knowing that the manual ticket had a corresponding ticket number in software because the mag stripe could not be read. The system is designed so that there can be no manipulation of ticket data and that is a good thing. Unfortunately the system does not account for how to deal with ticket numbers stored in software that can not be removed when a mag stripe fails. The airport’s on-site auditors know this but it is a stretch to blame the county auditors for not knowing this. I think they were doing there jobs effectively. I don’t know if there is a blame issue here. There needs to be a way to remove tickets from software that can not be read and of course the operator should not have this capability. As technology gets more sophisticated we continue to learn and adapt.

I will repeat what I said in the first entry, the auditors from the county or whoever, had no clue as to how to audit a parking facility. Any competent parking auditor would have looked at the reports, and then looked at the corresponding tickets. They would have immediately found the discrepancy and  perhaps given the operator a slight gig for not finding the  problem with the TD's immediately, but would have noted that the operation did carry on in a manual mode and that in fact virtually all tickets and monies were accounted for.

I rail against operators constantly in this blog.  But lets be fair. When they are "caught" by an audit, the audit should at least tell the entire story. I held forth on the possibility of monies lost. But of course I was operating from a false premise, that is, that 12,000 tickets were actually missing. It turns out they weren't.

jvh

Central Begins Sell off of Assets

I mentioned a couple of months ago that I had heard that a list of Central's assets (read that parking locations owned) was being circulated to potential buyers. Well it seems that the sell off has begun. 11 properties in the company's home city of Nashville are on the block, and over 100 others nationwide are also up for grabs. Scarcely a weeks goes by that an announcement of the sale of management locations isn't announced.

The number of locations run by Central is shrinking, down over 100 locations since December. The majority of its prime real estate is on the block, they are selling their headquarters in Nashville, and I'm told by sources in the UK, that their entire European operation is up for grabs.

Although management says that this is all part of their plan begin before the sale, its difficult to understand why, if the plan was in the works, they couldn't have gotten it underway, created a more healthy company and THEN sold the new revitalized organization for a much higher price.  But then, as I've said, I don't really understand high finance.

The question asked by my friend in the UK was:

I was wondering how amongst all the doom and gloom of news about sales, cutbacks and assets disposal are they able to retain good people and keep up morale? or are we about to loose some good and experienced people out of the parking industry? It will be a shame?

I don't think the good people will leave the industry, just move to other companies where they may be sorely needed.  A number of people in senior positions at Central have moved on to other opportunities, but I'm certain many are staying and waiting to see what will happen. Whenever there are changes, people get nervous.

Time will tell the tale.

JVH

Montgomery County (MD) Next Baghdad by the Bay Nominee

The city county parking office wanted to make the parking rates more consistent across the county. So they included a plan in the budget -- noting to the County Council that it would raise upwards of three quarters of a million dollars in additional revenue.  It passed with no opposition. No opposition, that is, until the local merchants found out, then all hell broke loose. Read all about it in WAPO

First of all, its billed as a way to raise money -- not help the parking/congestion problems. BAD

Second, the local community wasn't brought in to the conversation and sold on the concept. BAD

Third, who says parking rates should be consistent? They should change from street to street based on usage, time, and the need to keep on street spaces available. BAD

Fourth, although I can't be sure about this, the staff actually explained what they were doing in detail, first to the community and then to Commissioners. BAD

Fifth, Although I can't be sure about this, it doesn't seem that the 'plan' is in place to solve any problems, but to make the rates "consistent" and to raise money. BAD

Sixth, none of the money is going to the areas from which it came, to provide services and infrastructure. BAD

Seventh, I remember that some areas of Silver Spring are quite congested during parts of the day and evenings. So bad that I think that people go elsewhere. If you aren't solving a problem, why do anything. BAD

Etc

You get the drift. Poorly planned, poorly sold, poorly executed. And the County Council, reacting to public pressure, will resend the changes. Time wasted, nothing accomplished.

Hat Tip to RM

JVH

I Love Paris in the Summer when it rains like hell

Took the Eurostar (train) to Paris from London yesterday. Its great -- only 2.5 hours door to door. Purpose of the visit: To check out Skypark's new automated facility that supports Cartier's building in the French Capital. Skypark was called in to replace an existing automated system that wasn't providing the service the owner required.

Its a perfect automated application. All VIP parking for the company. about 100 spaces five stories underground. Works like a champ. Everyone seems very pleased. I think it works well because of the application. There are no attendants but everyone who uses it works there and can be trained on what to do. It uses the building prox card system to call up the cars and its "robot" lifting system rather than "pallet" seems to be an advantage.

By they way, this is Skypark out of Edinburgh, not Apex Skypark out of California. There seems to be some confusion as to the company names. They are not connected in any way, I"m told. Skypark has working systems in Edinburgh, Budapest and Szepark, Hungary, Penang, Malaysia, two in Sydney, and the one in Paris. Apex Skypark is negotiating contracts in the US and Middle East.

I'll give you a full report in PT September.

This was the first time I have been to Paris in nearly two decades. The place has changed, a lot. The French are actually nice. They are helpful, try to speak your language, and all around 180 degrees from what I had experienced in the 1980's. 

Thunderstorms were rolling across the city of light and let me tell you, they know how to throw a storm in Paris. The heavens certainly did open. I was able to purchase an umbrella and all was well.

Caught the 315 back to London...Tonight I'm with the British Parking Association at a reception in the houses of Parliament. Will report back later.

All the best

JVH

Thank Heavens we live in the USA Who could afford to live in the UK

Let's see:

Big mac, fries, small coke -- $11
Gallon of Gasoline -- $7.56
2 bedroom condo 500 square feet -- $900,000 and not in a good part of town
Bottle of average white wine -- $20
Bottle of single malt whisky -- in the US $20 - UK $50
Cab in from the airport -- about 25 miles -- $100
Pub lunch -- shrimp and chips - cheese fries - two wines two beers -- $55
Hotel room -- Hilton Average -- $500 a night
Lunch -- Two mediocre pizzas, four glasses of wine -- $75
Dinner for two -- Italian -- pasta, salad, one bottle of wine, garlic bread -- $85
Cable to connect iPOD to pc -- just the cable, nothing else - $60
House I'm staying in  - large -- perhaps 20,000 square feet but needing conservatively two million dollars in repairs -- 10 bedrooms, good part of town -- its a row house -- has been offered $70,000,000 and turned it down.
Standard Ford Taurus -- nothing fancy -- $40,000
Fee if your car is towed $400
Standard parking ticket - $100 if not paid in 15 days $200
Off street parking space -- $800 a month

Average person's salary -- executive assistant, shop manager, etc $40,000 (top end)
Taxes average about 40%

Europe isn't much better -- Take a trip over here and get a real education. This is a wonderful city, great people, but how can they afford to live?

JVH

And the walls are periwinkle blue

Can you guess the city?

The new parking complaint office:

The walls are painted periwinkle blue, mellow yellow and sage green, calming colors to help soothe the customers and the workers. There'll be piped-in music, "a nice touch to add ambiance," said Houlihan. There's also checkerboard-patterned cork flooring to help muffle the noise.

Of course its not all peaches a cream --

With the help of Homeland Security funding, the streetside windows and see-through partitions in front of the clerks are bulletproof. On top of that, a metal detector at the front door, cameras, audio recorders  and two security guards will ensure safety. The clerks' booths and hearing rooms are equipped with panic buttons.

It's not that there have been a lot of violent outbursts before, but parking fines can add up mighty fast in ??????, where the city issues about 2 million citations a year.

OK, We can't control the border, terrorists are bombing airports in the UK, and we are spending homeland security money on bulletproof partitions and panic buttons. What does this say about parking, particularly in the most progressive city on the planet.?

Read the entire article. Come on Rachael -- what ever happened to that follow up article on the millions lost at Golden Gate garage and the deal cut by the city with the parking operator? I dropped her a note and suggested that she needed to spend a bit of time with Stan Delaplane's Ghost at the Buena Vista, sipping Irish Coffee and honing those adjectives. Periwinkle, indeed.

JVH

By any other name...tax tax tax

They won't call it a tax, but by any other name, it smells the same.  The City of Nottingham (of Robbing Hood fame) is instituting a tax over the next few years on private parking spaces. About $75 a month per space will be charged to the 500 largest employers in the area. This is not new in the UK, Birmingham does it already. Its a way to attempt to force employers to do something about commuting (hire people closer to the factory, institute car pooling, etc). The employer can pay the tax themselves or pass it along to the employee.

Just another government boondoggle to raise money "for public transportation." Let's see, we are taxing those who drive cars so those who take the bus can ride for free. OK, I don't have a problem charging for parking, you know that. And I believe that providing parking should be the decision of the business owner. And I believe that parking should be unbundled so people know exactly what providing parking should cost. However this thinly veiled attempt at another tax is another example of government taking money from one pocket because its gotten all that was available from another.

Will this tax be used to lower other business taxes (HA), will the money go back into the industrial estates to clean them up, provide better police and fire protection, better streets, maybe a tree or two?(HA HA). The money is supposed to be used for better public transportation. As with most of these taxes, I'll believe it when I see it.

Consider the lottery tax. Well, that's what it is -- People, mostly poor people, are snookered into buying lottery tickets. 100% of them, less one, win nothing. zero, zip. The money goes to pay for the administration of the lottery and the rest (in California, anyway) is supposed to go to schools. Are our schools any better than they were before the lottery. Not by any measurable amount. However the government supports this hidden tax on a subset of our population. Shame...

Be alert -- your local government will pick up on this, if they haven't already, and in the name of environmentalism, or global warming, or something, will put this in place and businesses will decide that its a better idea to move to China than put up with this tax after tax after tax.

JVH

They work in pairs here

I have noticed during my past two trips to the UK that the traffic wardens (read that parking enforcement officers) work in pairs. When I asked about this I was given the company line (more efficient, etc) however I really think its for self preservation. The Brits hate, I and mean HATE these guys. They are constantly being assaulted, both verbally and physically. They really need to go on a PR program here to change an image.

These guys are all private. They work for parking operators who are hired by the local city councils to write tickets and provide other enforcement services (booting and towing).  That fact probably reduces the possibility for flexibility (writing warnings and the like). If the enforcement provider is on a cost plus contract, and gets a percentage of the take, it can mean a pretty aggressive enforcement program.

I think that if a person walks up while the ticket is being written, that ticket could be voided and a warning issued. It would be great PR and everyone would be happy. A quick software change in the ticket writing equipment could ensure that warning were connected to specific tickets (the one in process when the event occurred) or for specific issues. The system could track warnings and drivers getting more than a certain number in a specific period of time could be cited.

The amount of revenue lost would be minimal and the PR would be "over the top" as they say here.

Plus they would be able to reduce the number of traffic wardens by half or cover a much larger area since doubling up would not be necessary.

J

The Chinese Consulant

Its almost 8 AM and already people are lining up at the Chinese legation next door to my digs here in London. I stay at a B and B on Portland Place that happens to be next door to the building where the Chinese issue visas. If you want to take a trip to that nation of 2 billion people, you have to have a visa. Its pretty much automatic you just pay the fee -- about $100 and you go.  Of course that fee is for one visit only.  So this is pretty much a scam (I think the US does it, too).  It means that the Chicoms net hundreds of millions of dollars every year as an entry fee. Not bad work if you can get it.

My guess is about 500 people a day go through this embassy in the UK -- you do the math.

JVH

I almost hate to bring this up

A correspondent sent me this picture:

His concern was that the purpose of the sign was to keep motorcycles out of the garage and wondered if the sentiment was pervasive.

I actually haven't seen this sign a lot lately. Typically manufacturers, one in particular, put them on their gates probably directed to do so by lawyers. The main purpose was to warn pedestrians about the potential dangers of walking under an open gate. Of course bicycles and motorcycles are in the same category as the mass of metal might not be enough to notify the gate that there is an object under it and keep it from closing.

My suspicion is that if a motorcycle wanted to park in a garage and was willing to pay the fee, they would be welcome. Usually they just drive around the gate and negotiate with the attendant. Many garages actually have small spaces blocked out for two wheeled vehicles.

By the way, my guess is that the reason most gates don't have these signs any more is that they do no good, either in keeping out pedestrians or lowering liability. If they are going to sue you, they are going to sue you. And they are going to sue everyone, the owner, operator, installer of the gate and the gate manufacturer. This is true even if the gate was doing exactly what it was supposed to do, close right after a car.

I am often filled with wonder at the stupidity of the average person on the street. They will pass a sign that says "vehicles only" walk over a perfectly good sidewalk, and then follow a car out through a lane where they have just watched a gate open in front of the car -- don't they think that gate is going to close?

Oh well.. By bringing this up, I'll probably cause lawyers across the fruited plain to dig in old cases and begin class action lawsuits against everyone in sight.

JVH

On the road

I'm traveling again -- this week its Europe -- London and Paris -- mostly work. I have meetings with parking folk in London -- culminating with a reception at Parliament where PT staffer and British Parking Association Prez Peter Guest is receiving an award from the august body. On Monday I'll spend the day in Paris, checking out a new automated garage that has come on line in the past couple of months. Taking the "chunnel" train over from Waterloo to Gare to Nord.  Round trip -- leaving at 6:30AM, back before 5.

When the train that goes through the tunnel under the English Channel began its run about a decade ago, they had a race. It began at the Ritz in downtown London and finished at the Hotel d'Opera in Paris. One group took the train, the other flew from Heathrow. The train group won by over an hour. Of course the flight was quicker, but the security rigmarole, added to the fact that it takes at least 45 minutes to get from the Ritz to Heathrow at one end, and a like amount at Charles De Gaulle on the other, made the difference.

Sometimes the fastest mode of transportation isn't always the most efficient.

More on all this later

JVH

We hold these truths...

There are few countries that actually celebrate their founding. Canada Day passed with barely a whimper "up north." If you go to the UK and ask what they celebrate you are looked at with confusion. Most of Europe and Asia are the same. Their major celebration is New Year's Day. Communists celebrate May Day with rockets and armies. But we here in the US are unique, I think.

We celebrate our country's birthday with a day off, picnics and barbeque's, ball games and fun. But we also have formal celebrations -- there are over 100 events in the LA area alone with parades, festivals, speeches and the like. There are few cities and towns across the country that don't have some kind of event, most ending with fireworks depicting the bombardment of Ft McHenry in Baltimore and Francis Scott Key's famous words that afterwards "our flag was still there." There are few families that won't do something "special" on this day. Most having to do with food, family, friends and being outside.

Yes, we are a strange people. We sing our national anthem at ball games, concerts, and graduations. We are criticized for putting out the flag and red white and blue bunting on President's day, Memorial Day, and Independence Day. Yet we do it. Year after year.

Symbols are important. Our celebration is a symbol. As is the flag. They symbolize the sacrifice that many have made to give us the freedom to criticize the very symbols of that sacrifice. That, of course, is the irony. Those who would hide the flags and stop the celebrations would be jailed for simply saying those words in at least a quarter of the world.

This place is unique. Nothing like it anywhere. America is growing, mostly by immigration, from Europe, Asia and Latin America. Why? Because this is a country of freedom, opportunity, and acceptance. We have fought wars against oppression, slavery, and terror. And we have won. And we will win again. No doubt. Its in our soul, in our genes. Americans are slow to anger, take a bit too long sometimes to get to the game. But when we are there, we prevail, sometimes in spite of ourselves.

Sure we make mistakes, but we own up to them, make amends, and press on. We're human. We are accused of being imperialists, but we have not ruled in any country we have fought. We returned the following countries (not a complete list) to their people: Japan, Korea, Germany, Italy, the Philippines, Panama, Mexico, Liberia, Most of North Africa, the list is endless. In no case did we "conquer" and then keep the land and rule the people. We worked as fast as we could to return their countries.

The reason? Because we believe in freedom, not just ours, but everyone's. Jefferson wrote: "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal. endowed by their creator with certain unalienable rights. Life,. Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness."  Take a moment to read the entire text here

This is a great country. Better, in fact, than most. Bet on it. Be proud of it. It's yours.

Happy Birthday, America.  Many  many  returns...

JVH

 

The Lasest Scam du Jour

The employees of a rental car agency in Manhattan (how did I know it was there) were parking their rental cars on the street. Then after hours, when people wanted to park on the street to attend a nearby theater or restaurant they would offer to move their car (the rental car) so the person could park there. The cost $25. They would put the rental car in the agency's garage.  If there were 10 spots a day -- they could net $250 a day and if there was turnover, perhaps twice that. 

The local whistle blower Geraldo type heard about it and has it on tape. Check it out here.

This problem would have simply been solved if the on street pricing was close to the off street pricing ($47). My guess is that the on street prices were either free, or minimal. These entrepreneurs are rather sleazy but they understand the economics of on street parking better than the bureaucrats in the Big Apple.

JVH

But...Why not charge for parking

The neighborhood around a popular trail head in Phoenix is up in arms because hikers are parking in their neighborhood. They want em OUT.  There have been a number of ideas (expand the parking lot that exists, put in a residents only area) but no one has made what I think is the appropriate suggestion. Charge for on street parking in the area.

All the money collected could go back into the neighborhood or build the parking lot. It could be used to have a daily patrol to clean up any litter. And, if they had to pay for parking, maybe hikers would meet somewhere else and carpool to the trail head.

Let the market place work.

JVH

Parking and Dear Abby

A woman wrote to Dear Abby about and incident in a parking lot. It was full and people were cruising waiting for someone to leave. A car pulled out right in front of the car she and her husband were in. Just as he started to pull in, a woman from the street ran up and created a scene to block to space and "hold" it for her husband who was still out on the street. The writer's mate asked the woman politely to stand aside and she became hysterical. He decided  that descrtion was the better part of valor and let the woman have the space.  The writer asked Abby what she should do. Abby's Answer:

Dear Unsure: Your husband was not out of line in asking the woman to move. She was nervy and wrong to block traffic and take advantage. And if the police had been summoned, they probably would have backed you up.
What would I have done in that situation? Had I been behind the wheel, I would have been tempted to very ... slowly ... continue ... parking my car ... until she either moved or I squashed her like a bug against the wall or the car in front. (That's why my husband does most of the driving when we're together.)

Priceless

JVH