Gaithersburg outlines new citywide parking-permit program, sets March–July timeline for rules and software rollout

Gaithersburg staff on Monday presented a plan to replace the city’s patchwork of residential and commercial permit-parking programs with a single, city-managed system and proposed timeline that would put regulations and software in place this spring and a system go-live by July 1.

The plan, developed by an ad hoc permit-parking committee and city staff, would consolidate administration into the city’s Planning and Code Administration department, require applicants to prove address eligibility, and use license-plate-based permits (with optional license-plate-recognition enforcement) instead of hang tags or decals. “This same system will also provide all parking enforcement functionality,” said Brian Helms of the city’s information-technology department.

Why it matters: Council members and staff said the city needs a single, data-driven program that increases enforcement capacity, preserves neighborhoods that already have permit programs and prevents ad hoc, localized fixes that shift parking problems to nearby streets.

What staff proposed: The city is running a request-for-proposal (RFP) to select a vendor that can process residential and commercial permit applications, handle temporary guest permits and integrate with the city’s financial system (Tyler enterprise ERP, formerly Munis). Staff said the scoring committee will hold system demonstrations with finalists over the next two weeks and plans to return to council on Feb. 3 with a resolution to award a contract. Implementation work would proceed in spring with a targeted system go-live on July 1, concurrent with the expected effective date of new permit parking regulations.

Legal and regulatory changes: City staff and legal counsel described a draft rewrite of City Code section 14-17(a) to (1) state the city’s legitimate government interest in regulating parking, (2) give the city manager authority to adopt implementing regulations, (3) establish permit fees and (4) set enforcement authority tied to sections 14-4 and 14-5 for removal, impoundment and notices of violation. “Subsection (b) will establish legal authority for the city manager to adopt regulations for the purpose of implementing the new permit parking program,” said Eric Perla during the presentation.

Enforcement and technology: The new system will register permits by license-plate number; enforcement officers would check plates either manually or using license-plate-recognition (LPR) cameras if the council elects to add that option. Staff said LPR capability is included in RFP responses and may be contracted as an option later. “We have requested from all proposers their LPR capabilities,” Helms said.

Grandfathering and community concerns: Staff proposed automatically incorporating existing neighborhood permit programs into the new regulatory structure rather than annul them. Several council members said they supported keeping existing permit areas in place to avoid unsettling neighborhoods, while also giving residents a path to petition out if they no longer want permits. “We didn’t want to pull the rug out from under them and say it no longer exists,” staff said. Council Member Rob Wu and others pressed for criteria to be applied to existing programs so that grandfathering does not become automatic regardless of current conditions.

Public process: Staff suggested the council decide whether to subject the implementing regulations to a formal public hearing. Multiple council members indicated support for a public hearing so residents can weigh in on the draft regulations and on how the system will work in practice. City Manager Tanisha Bridal said there will be “a lot of education and outreach” after a vendor is selected and before the system goes live.

Next steps and timeline (as presented by staff): Feb. 3 — introduction of code amendment to rewrite 14-17(a); March 3 — public introduction of permit parking regulations (and, if council so chooses, rules would be set for public hearing); April 7 — policy discussion and public hearing on regulations; May 5 — adoption of code rewrite; July 1 — contemplated effective date and system go-live.

Council reaction: Multiple members praised the data-driven approach and asked staff to provide technology demonstrations for the public once a vendor is chosen. Council Member Jamil Hernandez asked that, when feasible, staff provide a high-level software demo so residents can see how they will apply and manage permits. Staff said roughly 321 addresses are currently eligible under existing carry-over zones and that the outreach program will include letters, mailings and email notices.

What the plan does not yet resolve: Fees have not been set; the code rewrite would authorize the city manager to set fees by regulation. The council will also need to decide whether to require a public hearing on the implementing regulations when they are introduced in March.

Ending: Staff will return to council on Feb. 3 with the contract award recommendation and the council will consider the code amendment and whether to put the new regulations to public hearing in March.