Recently, I sat down with Jay Beeber to pick his brain about the state of parking in Los Angeles. Many people know Jay as the guy that fought to eliminate camera tickets in LA. His current exploits involve forming the Los Angeles Parking Freedom Initiative and being on an Eric Garcetti committee to come up with ideas to improve parking enforcement. Oh, and did I forget to mention, he’s also running for District 4 City Council. Busy guy.

PSLA: What are your thoughts on the current state of parking tickets in Los Angeles?

JB: Parking tickets in Los Angeles are used as a way to help balance the budget. The money from parking tickets go into the general fund where they can be allocated for just about anything. They have to balance the budget, so if they raise parking fees by $5 dollars for 2 million tickets per year … that’s something they don’t have to cut.

Beeber and others would like to see money generated from parking tickets separated out of the general fund and kept in its' own dedicated fund, so that the money the city earns from parking tickets goes to improve parking, transportation, sidewalks, and streets in Los Angeles. He believes this money should be used exclusively for parking and transportation issues that plague Los Angeles, instead of being a stop-gap for the city’s budget problems.

PSLA: What are some recent parking reforms you are proud of?

JB: Policy enforcement as changed a lot. Enforcement officers used to be able to get your license plate number as you drove off and you could get a ticket in the mail. Now, the parking enforcement officer must attempt compliance first. This means you have to have the chance to move before the ticket is issued. That is a rule now. This came out of our work.

PSLA: Would you describe yourself as a parking activist?

JB: It started with the red light cameras. I saw on the news that red light cameras were causing more collisions, so I started looking into it.

Due to Jay Beeber's outspoken work to fight against red light cameras in LA, we no longer have to pay these tickets. Woot Woot. Many of the cameras still remain though and the confusion surrounding them is anything but resolved. I've personally seen a number of friends receive these tickets in the mail and be unsure if they need to pay it or not.

One thing that is not up for debate though is that Beeber is continuing to work hard to resolve many of the injustices we all see in our current parking enforcement. Here’s a list of some of the suggestions and goals of the committee Jay is on. Let’s hope Garcetti and the city take them to heart.

1. Phased elimination of meter time limits. Instead, the amount the meter charges would simply increase if you stayed there for long periods of time.
2. Tiered fine structure for parking violations.
3. Separation of parking fee revenue from the General Fund.
4. A system of local stakeholders providing input, design, and feedback on parking signs that impact their neighborhoods.
5. Expand Express Park and further support market based pricing systems.
6. Phased implementation of payment-in / payment-out systems. These would functionally treat parking meters like parking garages. You swipe your card when you park and when you leave. 

I’m praying for numbers 2 and 6 to be implemented the quickest. Yet, with $160 million in parking ticket revenue on the table, it’s hard to see the city walking away from such a lucrative and already established method of filling their budget shortfalls. 

Los Angeles has always been a hotbe of innovation and development. We may not be as bleeding edge as San Francisco as one of my favorite angel investors, Jason Calacanis continually reminds me on his podcast This Week in Startups, but we still have produced some pretty tech savy companies like Snapchat, Tinder, Whisper, and Science. When I heard LA was going to ban a parking app, I was a little surprised. The apps Los Angeles is in the process of banning are pay-to-park apps. These are apps that encourage people to occupy in-demand parking spots and then sell or rent them out to others that need that spot.

There is really only one app this currently applies to and that’s MonkeyParking. MonkeyParking recently moved into the areas of Beverly Hills, Santa Monica, and Los Angeles and definitely ruffled some feathers. They arrive with plenty of baggage too. To begin with, the were basically run out of their home town, San Francisco, because people there didn’t have a stomach for private citizens selling and/or renting out public parking spots. Unfortunately for MonkeyParking, it doesn’t look like Los Angeles is too fond of the idea either.

Council member Mike Bonin recently put through a motion to outlaw parking-sale apps in Los Angeles. Bonin contends this is, “extortion masquerading as the sharing economy.” Ouch.

The sharing economy Bonin refers to has spawned numerous mega-services that have revolutionized industry today. These include such companies and sharing apps as Uber, Lyft, and Airbnb. Many of these same sharing apps are also entangled in their own form of litigation and regulatory battles throughout the country.

Our generation's desire to shake things up and “share” doesn’t always go over well with those that feel some of these innovations go too far. Hey, I like to share, but I’m not to happy about my neighbor subletting her apartment and I end up having to deal with people partying all night on a weekday. Plus, they didn’t even invite me to the party. How rude.

MonkeyParking CEO Paolo Dobrowolny, says his app is not trying to make it more difficult to park and would actually help LA to better align the value of the parking spots. He claims his company would work to prevent greedy sellers sitting on spots for exorbitant amounts of time and is willing to work with cities for revenue-sharing agreements. That sounds like something LA would be all about, especially if they lose some of the revenue from their parking ticket cash cow.

At this point though, if the city of Los Angeles did flip-flop and allow such apps after banning them simply because there were getting a piece of the profits, it would look awfully bad for someone. With that said, it wouldn’t be the first time money trumped politics. We will have to wait and see if MonkeyParking has enough clout to make it’s vision of the shared-parking future a reality in Los Angeles.

Nicole Sylianteng didn’t mean to revolutionize parking signs in New York, Los Angeles, and Vancouver. She simply needed to build her portfolio for her MFA, but when a great idea sees the light of day, people tend to take notice.

In a way, I think of Nicole and I as being two peas in a pod. We both saw a common problem and went about trying to solve it. The problem was the ridiculously confusing parking signs in urban areas. She attacked it with her background in design by creating signs that simplified sometimes six contradictory signs into one simple one, while I applied technology and created an app, Park Safe LA.

Sylianteng’s innovation was soon recognized in the popular media with articles appearing in The Atlantic, Wired Magazine, and Gizmodo among others. People in the world of traffic and transportation have taken notice too.

Recently, councilmember Paul Krekorian, of district 2 in Los Angeles, recently put forward a motion for a test program of Nicole’s signs. Exactly what districts will be testing the signs out remains to be seen, but sources close to the issue say a number of Councilmembers are jockeying for the opportunity to ease the parking sign burden in their districts with Sylianteng's signs. Vancouver also recently approached Nicole and it appears to only be a matter of time before everyone discovers the simplicity of these signs.

As Sam Cook once sang, “A change is gonna come.” This change in the world of parking innovation is far overdue. “We don’t need tons of money to do a digital system,” Sylianteng explains. “We need simpler signs.” She makes a lot of sense. While people like me are trying to make it easier to understand complicated signs with technology, Sylianteng turned the entire problem on its’ head by reimagining the actual signs from scratch.

Sam Morrissey formerly the City Traffic Engineer of Santa Monica and currently Associate Vice President for the traffic analytics company Iteris warns though that changing signs can involve a lot of state and federal regulations that could take years. This means these signs may initially be used as supplements to existing signs. Either way though, it’s exciting to see innovation and truly great ideas applied to a once impenetrable problem.

It still remains to be seen what cities will signup to actually implement Nicole’s  signs after these test programs are completed, but change is definitely coming and Nicole Sylianteng is absolutely a part of the solution.

Follow Nicole's adventure in the world of parking signs at To Park or Not To Park.     

I recently responded to a question from a PSLA user named Andrew who wanted to know if he could legally park his bike on the sidewalk in LA, so I decided to break down some of the common motorcycle parking myths for you this week.

Parking your motorcycle in LA can be confusing  because there are the technical rules for motorcycles and then there are the actual rules that are enforced. These two things are often as far apart as James Harden and a Gillette razor endorsement. (that’s a basketball reference). Here’s a breakdown of motorcycle parking laws for LA.

1.     Can I park my motorcycle on the sidewalk as long as it’s not blocking the sidewalk?

No. Under CA Vehicle Code 22500 you can never park your motorcycle on the sidewalk legally. I know you’re thinking you park your bike by the sidewalk all the time without any problems.  Most parking officers don't enforce this, but know that you are always taking a risk of getting a ticket if you park there.

2.     If the spot says permit parking only, can I still park my motorcycle there because it doesn’t take up the full spot?

Negative: If a sign says permit parking only it applies equally to cars and motorcycles. If you park your bike there you can could get a ticket.

3.     Can I share a metered parking spot with a car?

Sometimes false and sometimes true. This varies widely by town ordinance and enforcement.  Even in most towns where this is technically illegal it is a rare parking enforcement officer that will actually ticket you it. Be warned though, it is not unheard of for this to actually garner a ticket in some parts of metropolitan Los Angeles.

4.     I can park my bike in between two parking spots?

No. This, like most answers, comes down to enforcement. A lot of officers won’t ticket for this, but technically they could. If the area in between the parking spots is a red zone you will definitely get a ticket, but if it’s not you’re probably okay.

Here’s a little light reading to help you fall asleep at night.

CVC § 22500 
No person shall stop, park, or leave standing any vehicle whether attended or unattended, except when necessary to avoid conflict with other traffic or in compliance with the directions of a peace officer or official traffic control device, in any of the following places:
. . .
(f) On any portion of a sidewalk, or with the body of the vehicle extending over any portion of a sidewalk . . . . Lights, mirrors, or devices that are required to be mounted upon a vehicle under this code may extend from the body of the vehicle over the sidewalk to a distance of not more than 10 inches.

On August 21st a number of protestors and even some parking enforcement officers headed to downtown LA to hand out fake parking tickets to raise awareness regarding Wall Street fees. The gist of the fake parking tickets is to try and make a connection between how expensive and pervasive tickets are in LA and the excessive fees LA currently pays to big Wall Street firms for bad deals negotiated in the past.

Although I am the first one to trumpet the absurdity of parking ticket prices and excessive ticketing in LA, I’m not sure this protest hits the mark. I can understand the desire to equate the nearly $300 million the city brings in for parking tickets with the reported $300 million they dish out to Wall Street in annual fees, but I feel this attempted correlation is week at best.

Instead of trying to create a connection between parking tickets and some sort of tangential Wall Street issue, why not focus on creating pressure to pas legislation to at the very least make the city spend the money they collect from parking violations on our roads, sidewalks, and parking facilities. Currently, the city dumps these funds into the general fund where they go towards numerous non-parking related issues. This type of common sense connection of the source of funds with their related issues is the type of thing people can rally behind.

The fact that parking ticket reform is nearly universally supported here in LA doesn’t mean we should try and connect it with some sort of larger economic issue. I support organizations like the Los Angeles Parking Freedom Initiative that outlines caps on parking tickets, separating parking ticket funds from the general fund, the creation of neighborhood liaisons, and an improved ticketing review process as their primary focus.

This is an organization with a primary focus on parking issues in Los Angeles. It is a mistake to try and tie LA ticketing with larger Wall Street backlash. Let this issue stand on its’ own. It is when we start grouping dissimilar issues that we diminish our ability as a community to accomplish even the most obvious and necessary reforms. 

The people of Los Angeles got a sliver of justice and dare I say redemption this week when judge, James Chalfant of Los Angeles Superior Court ruled that LA could no longer outsource its appeals process. 

If you’re wondering what that aroma is you smell wafting past your nose … it’s the smell of long overdue justice. It’s long been known that appealing your parking ticket was about as successful as a LeBron James hair growth tonic. Most people simply pay their tickets knowing that the existing appeals process as completely futile no matter how unjust the ticket.

It is common knowledge that all initial appeals against parking tickets are denied. Then again, since LA outsourced ticket appeals and collection to the private company Xerox who turned around and outsourced it to the private company PRWT, what motivation do these companies have in making sure you received justice? Last time I checked, the only thing they care about is profits. Have we learned nothing from watching Michael Douglass in Wall Street?

The crappier the appeals process these private companies establish the better their bottom-line. This is what we call massive conflicting interests or what I like to call business as usual. The interests of citizen to receive judicious oversight of a program that grosses over $150 million for private companies is slim to nil, unless they are forced to have it. This is was we like to call oversight and accountability.

It seems we as citizens should have protected ourselves against our own publicly elected officials passing the buck on making sure we get a fair shake in parking ticket appeals. Wait for it … Wait for it … It turns out, we did. Judge Chalfant noted that the current statute requires that the city does the initial review of all appeals. Way to go us for not trusting our government to do what was actually in our best interest and creating legal oversight. Someone was clearly thinking ahead.

In a move of true shock and awe, Xerox plans to appeal. Ok, maybe not so much shock or awe, but more like yeah and duh. What big business would go down without a fight? I’d expect them to throw a solid $50 million in lawyer’s fees at it. I mean, just think about how many B.S. tickets you’ve paid out over the years. Now, multiply that by 12.8 million, the population of the Greater Los Angeles area. Having to not collect on bogus tickets could really cut into year-end bonuses for CEOs at Xerox and PRWT.

The only question I have is how did it take this long for this to be challenged? It’s not like this is a new system or we all didn’t know it was unfair. I guess it all comes down to who’s going to take the time and energy to fight a system, instead of simply complain about it. For the record, I was one of those mostly complaining.    

New York based parking enthusiast, Nikki Sylianteng, has created the best parking signs ever. Yes, I am being serious. Simple, straightforward and easy to understand parking signs can exist in Los Angeles and New York. For a long time accomplishing this was thought to be akin to time travel: theoretically possible when are knowledge was far greater, but never to be accomplished in our own lifetimes.

Sylianteng used a common sense approach to complicated parking signs and is now spreading her gospel of simplicity to whoever will listen.  Her parking signs transform cumbersome multi-sign spots into a single easy to understand color-coded sign that takes one tenth of the time to understand and leaves you actually feeling confident you understand what the sign said.

Sylianteng set out to create these simplified signs after receiving what she describes as “one too many parking tickets.”  I think we can all relate. This was the same impetus for my parking app, Park Safe LA. Sylianteng’s been adapting her method of simplified parking signs for months with feedback from everyday citizens and input from some industry pros.

All you have to do to understand just how great these signs are is compare a current complicated version of a sign alongside her own simplified color-coded version of that same sign. The stark difference is obvious. One leaves you wondering when hieroglyphics became the official written language of the LADOT, while the other presents a greatly simplified and streamlined approach. It cuts out the redundancy and apparent contradiction and instead focuses on a single graphic representation.

People are starting to take notice too. Sylianteng was recently featured in a Gizmodo article written by Jamie Condliffe for her innovation and she will also soon be meeting with the largest online retailer of traffic signs, myparkingsign.com.

The only question now is what will it take to get them implemented on our streets.  Parking signs are subject to state and local regulation like a lot of things that appear overly cumbersome. It still remains to be seen what it will take to cut through all this bureaucratic red tape to get these signs actually on our streets. Follow her progress on her blog ToParkOrNotToPark.com.

I used to think California’s hands-free law meant that you can talk on the phone or listen to music using your earbuds. No, sir. 

According to V C Section 27400 you can only use one earbud. The other ear has to be earbud free to hear all those wonderful sounds of our LA streets. You know, things like honking, cursing, screeching brakes from the person behind you running lines for an audition, or simply the insane guy on Western and Pico informing you his dog is Buddha. Yes, this man really exists.

Although I was a little bummed to learn about this earbud restriction since I am guilty of listening to “This Week in Startups” podcast as I drive around LA, I was happy to see that it also applies to motorcycle and bicycles too. We’ve all been driving down Santa Monica Blvd. only to have a bike dangerously weaving in and out of traffic oblivious of what’s going on around them because they can't hear how close they are to danger. I think it’s logical that if having one ear open makes sense for automobile drivers it should make even more sense for those on motorcycles and bicycles. I mean, if anyone needs to hear the flow of traffic I think it is those most likely to suffer a serious injury from the lack of information.

Believe it or not, I’ve even seen people driving in LA with Beats by Dre on their head. It should go without saying that this is illegal. Any headphones that cover both ears violates the California hands-free law in that you must have one ear clear from earbuds or headphones.  

As some of you know, I created my first iPhone app this past year called “Park Safe LA.” The response to the app was largely positive, but online comments on reviews are always a mixed bag. I find feedback falls into one of two passionate categories.

The first category is people that say the app is a great idea and that they are grateful someone created it. This category always makes me feel great that I took the time to teach myself Xcode and create “Park Safe LA.” Honestly, it’s also what keeps me wanting to improve it too.

The second category is those that call Park Safe LA, “An utterly useless app that only a complete moron would need.” Yes, that’s actually a direct quote from a comment under the LA Weekly article that ran. This line of thought believes all questions about parking signs in LA can be resolved by simply taking the time to read the signs. I find myself wanting to challenge these individuals to what I envision as a “sign-off.” This would amount to my version of a Wild West shootout, but instead of guns and dusty streets, we’d challenge each other to understand a variety of different LA parking signs.

I actually agree with the people in the second category to a certain extent. I largely believe this second category is made up of those that either lived in LA for a long time or largely visit the same parts of town every day. If you see the same signs every day like those around your apartment and work, you should probably get the hang of them pretty quickly, but if you are like me and find yourself in Culver City in the morning, Venice the afternoon, NoHo the late afternoon, Sherman Oaks in the evening, and downtown at night, it can get confusing. Each part of town has their own distinct signs with subtle differences.

The final group of people is those that appear to dig the app and want me to create an Android version. I appreciate this group, but sometimes find their method of communicating their desire for an Android version a little less than desirable. I’ve had people literally threaten to harm me because I initially only created an iPhone version. This seems a bit extreme guys.

To those that request this politely I am grateful for their input and want to make it happen, to those that call me an iPhone-centric asshole for not making an android version yet, I think they are confused how many hours this has taken and how little money it has garnered. This is absolutely a project bore out of my desire to create something that helps people and has very little to do with recouping money for the time I’ve put into it. 

From a first time app developer’s point of view, it is incredibly encouraging that people have such passionate feedback about my app, although the death threats are a bit much guys. 

I looked around yesterday while driving in Santa Monica and came to the realization there were robo-cameras on just about every corner. Was this really how we wanted to live? I know I can’t stand them and doubt too many Los Angeleans cheer at the sight of another ticket camera being installed on their block, so how did these cameras become such a large part of our community?

They sold it to us with safety. The infamous “S” word. After all, how can any sane person be opposed to more safety? It sounds so benign, so progressive, and so universally beneficial. Who wouldn’t support cameras that make us, our children, and possibly even our pets safer?

The equation of getting these cameras installed and spitting out tickets goes like this:

            


            Step 1: We’re only going to install these cameras on a trial basis. I swear.

            Step 2: During the trial period they won’t even issue real tickets, so don’t even worry.

            Step 3: Remember, they might really help keep your kids safe. You do love your kids don’t you?

            Step 4: (months later) Gee whiz, turns out these cameras are a huge success.   
                         Data? No, I left that at home, but you can trust me.

            Step 5: Eureka! Everyone pays and no politicians have any motivation to
                        remove a free revenue channel from their budget.

The only problem with this equation is that these cameras don’t make us safer. In fact, they make intersections where they are stationed more likely to have accidents.

San Diego Mayor Bob Filner had this to say, “Seems to me that such a program can only be justified if there are demonstrable facts that prove that they raise the safety awareness and decrease accidents in our city. The data, in fact, does not really prove it.”

It’s not just Filner who’s claiming these cameras don’t make us safer either. The National Motorist Association website lists a number of national and state level studies demonstrating this fact. http://www.motorists.org/red-light-cameras/studies.

These studies are by groups such as the public advocacy group U.S. PRIG, the Virginia Transportation council, AAA Michigan, Florida Public Health Review, The Transportation Research Board, and the University of South Florida among many others.

But why would ticket cameras make intersection more dangerous? Well, when these cameras are first installed most people aren’t aware of them, so lets say you pick up a ticket trying to stretch a yellow light. The next time you go through that same intersection, instead of looking at the cars around you to see if the intersection is safe, your eyes are glued to that light. The second it turns yellow you slam on your breaks to avoid a costly $480 ticket. Unfortunately, this stopping-short results in a lot of accidents.

The reality is that these cameras are all over Los Angeles. I don’t like the fact that we have them, but they’re paid for, so they’re here to stay. The good news is that we don’t have to pay these robo-tickets as long as they are issued in LA County. Thank god the courts stepped in to put a judicial end to this financially motivated money-grab.