Just call it a state-supported scam.
Once upon a time, parking enforcement was the purview of meter-maids on scooters tooling from spot to spot.
Today, it is big business.
For example, in 2008, Chicago received $1.15 billion when it signed a 75-year lease with a private outfit called Chicago Parking Meters LLC.
Within a decade, they have already collected revenue greater than their initial payment by jacking up parking fees and zealously enforcing meter times. And please note they have 64 years remaining on the lease.
It seems rather unfair that when folks fall behind in paying this outfit owned by a Wall Street bank and the Middle Eastern emirate of Abu Dhabi, they can have their driver’s licenses suspended by the state of Illinois.
Why should the power of the state be used to benefit a particular money-making enterprise?
Imagine a landlord or credit card company telling someone who has fallen behind on payments that if they don’t pay up, the state will suspend their driver’s license.
Not only would that be unfair, it also wouldn’t make much sense. After all, how is someone supposed to pay what they owe if they don’t have a way to drive to work?
But that is exactly what the state of Illinois does in helping companies and cities collect parking fees.
Illinois is one of 44 states that have policies of suspending driver’s licenses over unpaid fines, fees or court debts.
Last week, the Illinois General Assembly passed a measure that would end the practice of suspending licenses for unpaid parking fines. The measure awaits Gov. J.B. Pritzker’s consideration.
A high percentage of those suspensions affect drivers from low-income, black neighborhoods in Chicago and its suburbs ProPublica Illinois has reported.
Many of those affected have been unable to drive legally for years but do so anyway. If pulled over, they face further fines, fees and even jail time. This can exasperate a cycle of poverty that many spend decades trying to escape.
The bill on the governor’s desk also restores driving privileges for some 55,000 individuals whose licenses are currently suspended.
Passing this measure, is a smart move on the part of lawmakers. And I’m hopeful Pritzker will sign the measure.
But the underlying policy of paid, on-street parking needs to be examined. The practice deters people from doing business in central city locations and places downtown businesses at a disadvantage.
Communities such as Rock Island have moved away from this antiquated practice.
Beginning in 2016, it removed its parking meters and increased the time limit on most downtown parking spots from two to four hours.
Too often, cities have viewed parking policy as merely a means to generate revenue rather than an asset that should be promoted and used to make for a more vibrant, user-friendly community.
Debt-based license suspensions don’t protect or promote safer communities. They are indicative of an intrusive government that is callous toward the most vulnerable among us.
The Illinois Legislature made a step in the right direction by passing this measure. No one should have a license suspended for any non-safety related matter.
- Old Illini - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:18 am:
It isn’t clear if Chicago is getting part of the annual revenue. If not, renegotiate the lease. In any case, there is a case for new terms.
- Sayitaintso - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:19 am:
Pretty sweet deal for Chicago Parking Meters L.L.C., scraping up another 64 years of legal larceny. But, ‘a deal is a deal’. Until it isn’t. Enter more lawyers to fatten their wallets.
- Stupidity - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:31 am:
“After all, how is someone supposed to pay what they owe if they don’t have a way to drive to work?” The same can be said for failing to pay child support. Throw the deadbeat parent in jail, take their driver’s license, then, we the taxpayers can pay for the incarceration and the welfare payments to the other parent. Stupidity!
- PublicServant - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:31 am:
I’m with him for having the Governor sign the end of debt-based license suspension, but then he jumps the shark with his advocacy of calling parking meters an “antiquated practice”. I’m pretty sure that’s a non-starter in a city with the congestion problems that Chicago’s downtown area currently has. I mean “how dare they not let me drive my car downtown and hog one of the few parking spaces for half the workday!” isn’t gonna work buddy.
- Annonin - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:45 am:
Speaking of scams where is the video of the EIU oration?
- Stormfield - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:48 am:
The idea about abandoning on-street parking fees is more likely to generate the opposite effect that the author is targeting.
On street parking is limited. Allowing people to park for free and for an extended time in high-traffic areas makes available parking more scarce and difficult to find. People hoping to park nearby and visit businesses will be more frustrated, not less. People will need to decide whether to park farther away (or maybe in a garage for a fee), spend time circling and hoping, or simply going elsewhere.
- miso - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:49 am:
Under the contract, I believe the city has to pay for uncollected debt.
- yinn - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 10:49 am:
==They are indicative of an intrusive government that is callous toward the most vulnerable among us.==
I see this sort of callousness a lot. I call it the morality gap. When people hate local gov, the gap is typically a major reason because it’s tied to a culture that condones abuse of power and bad faith.
- Ebenezer - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:04 am:
Are there examples of 75-year government contracts where both sides are mostly happy 35 years in?
Note that in additions to being a financial albatross, the contract severely restricts Chicago’s ability to make changes to its streets for another 62 years.
- May soon be required - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:22 am:
That contract was unconscionable. City should do everything in its power to undo that deal.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:25 am:
===ethical, and reasonable laws===
They are neither. And Scott fully explains why above, but you’re not interested in actual facts.
- Last Bull Moose - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:26 am:
Pulling drivers licenses for nonpayment of parking fees is poor policy. There must be other ways to get the money.
Charging for parking usually helps store owners as more people can get into their store to shop. This is site specific and not true everywhere.
One reason for the parking deal was that the City Council had refused to move parking rates up to market rates. The city was leaving needed revenue on the streets. Privatization allowed for increased rates and directed anger towards the private company and away from the City Council.
- 62656 - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:27 am:
Can the General Assembly do anything to undo the deal? At least the General Assembly should pass a time limit on such deals, perhaps 10 years.
- drive on the parkway park on the driveway - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:44 am:
regulations of any kind have some mix of two basic motivations: public safety and social control. I feel there are very few safety concerns when it comes to how long a car can be parked in a spot and how much it costs
- Moe Berg - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:45 am:
revvedup: It was Daley who sold the meters and spent all the money, not Rahm. After he left office, Daley got a job at the law firm that negotiated the deal.
- Plutocrat03 - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 11:58 am:
Not only did Daley get a ‘job’ there is no visible work he’s is performing.
- scoff - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 12:05 pm:
law doesn’t kick in until 10 or more parking citations, and even then get a pre-hearing before any suspension;
sure, let’s add to Chicago’s deficit issues by taking away even more revenue.
- DIstant watcher - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 12:12 pm:
Just noticed that the blog didn’t fall back on Sunday. I’m posting in the future.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 12:14 pm:
===Just noticed that the blog didn’t fall back on Sunday===
I do this every single time. Ugh. I’ll fix it tonight. Setting an alarm.
- Demoralized - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 12:17 pm:
Just leave it Rich. It will be right again in March.
- OneMan - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 12:24 pm:
Would be curious how often the license suspension triggers payment.
However the amount of problems having unpaid municipal fines cause vs the value of the fines seems grossly disproportinal.
Like the article points out, why should a specific type of government ‘debt’ trigger this, but not others? If I owe money for fines for having my garbage can out too early or late (they write tickets for that in Aurora) they will not suspend my license.
Suspend licenses for moving violations, not for this stuff. You are just jerking over poor people, which at times seem to be a thing government loves to do.
- Just Me 2 - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 2:02 pm:
Um, Rock Island is probably doing what it can to encourage people to drive downtown. Chicago is trying to get people to take transit downtown. Two entirely different problems. The writer is obsessed with car culture and unaware of other modes of transportation.
- @misterjayem - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 2:11 pm:
“I have zero sympathy for people”
Could’ve stopped right there.
– MrJM
- revvedup - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 2:44 pm:
To Bull Moose: When parking tickets were moved from courts to admin hearings, municipalities were putting the unpaid fines into collections, so if they still weren’t paid, the collection agency could put it on their credit report. I worked for a town that did that; one man had to pay off $8,000 in fines so he could finance a new boat and trailer, and tickets were all written in our town over several months.
- cover - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 3:14 pm:
= Can the General Assembly do anything to undo the deal? =
No.
US Constitution, Article I, Section 10:
“No State shall… pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts”
This is the exact same reason that tier 1 pension benefits can’t be cut, even if a state constitutional amendment to the pension clause were somehow to pass.
- Commisar Gritty - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 3:23 pm:
Agree with misterjayem, and adding anyone who uses the term “sjw” unironically immediately outs themselves as an idiot.
- Bill - Tuesday, Nov 5, 19 @ 5:24 pm:
Suspensions are for failure to pay parking tickets. The city gets I believe all revenue from parking tickets no matter if they expired meters, fire hydrants, bus stops…
- Biker - Wednesday, Nov 6, 19 @ 8:09 am:
This is the tip of the iceberg. 64 years left. Other major cities are restricting traffic to the city center and using parking spots to quickly adopt EV charging and bike lanes. If this contract isn’t dealt with on the ownership side through eminent domain, we need to make enforcement fines more in line with an alternative payment structure to keep the money locally. I’d rather pay a $5 “fine” to the City using an app than a $5 “fee” to Wall Street to use a Chicago parking spot.