Committee backs ordinance to fine parking on park grass, debates booting policy

The Creation and Environment Committee voted to send to the full City Council a proposed ordinance that would make parking on the grass in Hartfordowned parks, open space or green space a fineable offense and authorize enforcement by the Hartford Parking Authority (HPA).

The proposal is intended to let the HPA enforce no-parking rules inside city parks, including portions of parkland that fall outside municipal boundaries, and to coordinate with friends groups and event organizers on targeted enforcement, HPA staff said.

HPA staff described repeated contacts from park groups about vehicles parking on turf and creating safety and traffic hazards. "The HPA has been contacted by multiple city parks in regards to parking concerns ... most notably, parking on the grass," a HPA presenter told the committee.

Why it matters: The ordinance expands enforceable categories in the municipal code to cover parking on grass and city-owned open spaces. Committee members pressed the administration about whether the change would allow HPA or police to immobilize vehicles that are "scofflaw" eligible (past-due citations that can trigger a boot), and whether immobilization should be explicitly prohibited inside parks.

Discussion and details

Council President Shirley Surgeon and other members said friends groups and park users back enforcement for repeated or dangerous parking. Surgeon asked whether cars with outstanding parking debt would be immobilized if cited while parked in a park; HPA said the matter depends on existing municipal code language and corporate counsel review.

HPA staff said immobilization is currently discretionary under section 22-42(b) of the municipal code, which addresses "impounding and immobilization authorized." A HPA official said: "I will say we don't boot on the weekends because the office isn't open. And I believe my understanding for the parks is that most of the concerns are Saturday and Sunday." The director also said the authority would prefer that any policy excluding booting in parks be spelled out in ordinance language rather than left to discretionary practice.

Committee members and DPW officials also discussed how the rule would apply to permitted events such as parades. City staff said event permitting already designates parking and that DPW and HPA participate in event planning; the ordinance authorizes fines but city event permits and DPW coordination can produce exceptions where appropriate.

Enforcement capacity and vendor support

HPA said it would likely add staff seasonally to cover weekend peaks and events; the authoritytickets on weekends for safety but does not typically immobilize vehicles on days the office is closed.

Outcome and next steps

A motion to forward the ordinance to the full council with a favorable recommendation passed. Committee members asked that the citycorporation counsel be consulted and that the council consider a subsequent amendment to clarify whether immobilization is permitted in parks. The committee noted interest in starting enforcement before peak summer use but said an explicit future amendment could be brought for section 22-42(b).

Votes at a glance: motion to send the ordinance to full council with a favorable recommendation — passed (yes: 2; abstain: 1).