Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
North Myrtle Beach workshop examines towing rules, drop fees and enforcement after years of complaints
Summary
At a council workshop staff, police and tow companies reviewed proposed changes to Chapter 22 on nonconsensual towing, debating matching state fee schedules, raising the 'drop' fee, requiring roadside card acceptance and adding auditing/notification rules; no ordinance changes were adopted and staff will return with options.
City staff and police walked North Myrtle Beach council members and members of the public through the history and mechanics of the city's towing ordinance at a lengthy workshop that explored higher drop fees, whether nonconsensual fees should match state schedules and how to curb predatory towing.
Staff framed the discussion by saying the original goal was to align nonconsensual towing rates with the same rates used for consensual towing but that the topic had raised additional operational questions, including how long officers should wait on scene, whether tow companies can accept credit cards roadside, and whether a separate approach is needed for residential versus commercial private property.
A police/public‑safety official recounted the ordinance's origins: multiple complaints in earlier years prompted tighter rules and a process that requires an agent on record and a notification to dispatch within a specified time. "We were getting voice mail after voice mail of complaints," the official said, and he told council that adopting closer oversight and audit provisions reduced the volume of predatory‑towing complaints.
Tow company operators urged the council to increase the drop fee, saying the current $40 figure is too low to cover insurance and equipment costs and discourages reputable companies from providing the service. "If you can't take payment on the side of the road, you shouldn't be towing," James Gause said, arguing that a realistic drop fee would be in the $100–$175 range and that fees should rise in line with state highway‑patrol rates.
Some residents and property owners said the current procedure places undue burdens on landowners—who must call police and wait—especially for small lots and residential property. One resident asked for a streamlined path to remove obstructing vehicles without tying up police resources. Staff and several council members suggested changing the ordinance to distinguish commercial towing from residential or hazard situations and to explore an audit program like neighboring municipalities.
Council members discussed several options with staff: adopting the state fee schedule for nonconsensual tows; setting the drop fee as a percentage of the full tow rate (council discussed roughly 50% as a benchmark); requiring tow companies to accept card payments or provide field payment options; creating an auditable notice and ticketing system so the city can review tow actions after the fact; and writing a clear trigger for any time limit that would allow a tow to proceed when police response is delayed.
No ordinance amendment or vote occurred at the workshop. Council asked staff to return with recommended language, implementation costs for auditing/notification systems, and options for separating residential and commercial towing rules before any final action.
