Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Parking Enforcement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council narrows parking-contractor discretion, reduces penalties amid ongoing litigation
Summary
Council approved first reading of an amendment to the city's parking ordinance that limits a contractor's ability to void tickets to six specified reasons, removes criminal penalties in favor of fines, and requires contractor personnel to swear an oath; the change responds to litigation over third-party enforcement.
On March 2 the North Myrtle Beach City Council approved on first reading a set of changes to the city's parking ordinance intended to strengthen the city's defense in ongoing litigation about use of private contractors to enforce parking rules.
The City Attorney told the council the revised ordinance removes a contractor's unfettered ability to dismiss tickets and instead allows voiding only in six specific circumstances listed in the ordinance. The amendment also removes criminal penalties for parking citations under the relevant section and replaces them with a $35 fine, which increases to $85 if unpaid after 30 days; the prior code allowed penalties up to $500 and possible incarceration.
“This is not a bulletproof solution,” the City Attorney said, “but we think it will shore up and give us the strength that we need to most likely successfully defend against the lawsuit in the event we're pulled back into this litigation.”
A member of the public, Jolene Puffer of 3506 Turner Avenue, questioned whether the approach still forces citizens to deal with a third-party contractor to seek dismissal and whether contractor employees who swear an oath but remain contractor personnel create a practical problem for accountability. “They're gonna swear an oath under the city to uphold the law of the city, but they're not working for the city,” Puffer said, asking whether citizens would still have access to a city-based appeal. The City Attorney responded that if the six specified reasons do not apply, a resident may still appeal a ticket to city court.
Council approved the measure on first reading by voice vote. The City Attorney said the change is primarily a housekeeping and defensive measure designed to narrow contractor discretion and align penalties with local enforcement objectives.
Next steps: the ordinance will return for a second reading and any formal adoption at a later meeting; staff emphasized that an appeal to city court remains an option for residents who do not qualify under the six contractor-voiding circumstances.
