Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee sends parking‑enforcement bill on with amendment after university testimony about vendor practices
Summary
The committee approved LD 21 37 as amended, preserving vehicle‑attached notices while exempting municipalities that adopt parking‑fee ordinances; University of Maine System representatives described vendor changes, reconciliation processes and fiscal impacts, and the committee voted 'ought to pass as amended' unanimously.
The committee moved LD 21 37, a bill modifying parking‑enforcement provisions for publicly accessible property, to a favorable work‑session outcome after hearing university and municipal concerns.
Staff explained the sponsor's amendment retains the requirement that notices be physically attached to vehicles at the time of violation but exempts municipalities that have adopted ordinances imposing a fee, fine or charge for parking on municipally owned public lots. The amendment also clarifies that notices should include the vehicle's plate type rather than registration type to avoid misidentification.
Sam Warren, representing the University of Maine System, told the committee that the system had experienced implementation problems with an earlier vendor and had since switched vendors and improved signage, extended grace periods and customer options. "In the first 6 months of this fiscal year, we processed 336,000 parking transactions," Warren said, stressing the volume and that USM has made changes to reduce the number of complaints. (Sam Warren)
Warren and other university representatives described their current vendor model: the vendor supplies infrastructure and processes transactions and receives an agreed fee and enforcement revenue share. Warren said the university receives minimal enforcement revenue (about 20% of fines) and that the vendor bears most infrastructure costs; the university estimated a one‑time cost of roughly $645,000 to replace vendor‑provided infrastructure if the contract were terminated, and annual personnel costs (about eight attendants plus support) if enforcement were moved in‑house.
After discussion the committee voted to report LD 21 37 'ought to pass as amended.' The transcript records the motion, a second and a unanimous 'of those present' vote.
