Choose Your Location
|
![]() |
Council Member Carol Schwartz said the findings confirmed her suspicions, and she urged new Mayor Adrian Fenty to work on a plan to bring the parking meter functions back in-house.
“This contract is not adequately monitored,” Schwartz said. “The District could do a better job for less money.”
Among the discoveries of the D.C. auditor:
» Privatization cost 33 percent more than had the work been performed in-house.
» Thirty-five percent of the audited meters couldn’t be found or accounted for.
» The District lost about $3.8 million in revenue from meters removed from locations around federal agencies.
Council Member Jim Graham, chairman of the public works committee, said he was troubled by the audit’s findings. The duties were handed over to the private sector in the 1990s because the District couldn’t maintain the duties, Graham said.
He said the District is much more efficient than it was 10 years ago, and he would consider looking at reclaiming the parking meter program. “This is a different government,” he said. “This government could do it.”
D.C. Department of Transportation Acting Director Emeka Moneme said in a written response that he takes the findings of the audit seriously, but that it overstates the amount of revenue the city would have earned without privatization.
The audit looked at the city’s contract with Dallas-based Affiliated Computer Services from 1999 to 2005 and found that privatization cost the city about $2.2 million more than it would have if District employees performed the job..
Although the District’s 16,500 parking meters generate valuable revenue, the auditor found that DDOT failed to maintain a usable inventory.
DDOT managers could not find 670 of the 1,906 meters that the auditors asked to sample.
Six meters had the same identification number and collected revenue, although the auditor couldn’t determine whether the money ever reached the District’s coffers.
ACS repeatedly failed to repair parking meters in time, but the District continued to issue tickets on the broken meters, undermining the credibility of the District and “unfairly shift[ing] the cost, impact and liability for poor contractor performance and inept contract administration ... to parking patrons,” the report said.
The audit also found that the District lost nearly $4 million in revenues after DDOT removed more than 2,000 parking meters from around federal buildings without obtaining an agreement with the federal agencies who asked for the meters’ removal.
The parking spaces were removed after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks and Oklahoma City bombings. The agencies have cited national security concerns to avoid paying for the lost spaces, according to Moneme’s response.



Comments from Examiner Readers
4:23 PM MST on Tue., Aug. 19, 2008 re: "Council to look into van-accessible parking"
Report as inappropriate
10:39 PM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
9:07 PM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
1:12 PM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
11:30 AM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
8:57 AM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
8:55 AM MST on Sat., Jul. 26, 2008
re: "Meters don't make the grade"
Report as inappropriate
2:32 PM MST on Mon., Feb. 4, 2008
re: "More solar-powered parking meters coming to Baltimore"
Report as inappropriate
1:20 PM MST on Fri., Jan. 25, 2008
re: "Supervisor’s measure could please opposing sides on parking issues"
Report as inappropriate
11:15 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008
re: "Supervisor’s measure could please opposing sides on parking issues"
Report as inappropriate
10:01 AM MST on Wed., Jan. 23, 2008
re: "Supervisor’s measure could please opposing sides on parking issues"
Report as inappropriate
12:01 PM MST on Thu., May. 10, 2007
re: "Illegally parked? New system photographs it"
Report as inappropriate
9:33 AM MST on Thu., May. 10, 2007
re: "Illegally parked? New system photographs it"
Report as inappropriate
7:57 AM MST on Thu., May. 10, 2007
re: "Illegally parked? New system photographs it"
Report as inappropriate
4:45 AM MST on Thu., May. 10, 2007
re: "New ticket device puts illegal parkers on camera"
Report as inappropriate
Examiner Reader Sam Burrello said:
My wife is disabled and we do drive a van but not wheel chair adapted. Only a fraction of hadicap people have these vans and if not allowed to park in van accessable sites we would have to pass these spaces and walk a great distance. The spaces would be empty if not allowed by car and non adapted vans
8 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Jimmy said:
More things in in the United States need to be free, like medical care and housing, along with public transportation and parking. How to pay for it all, just ramp up our production and tax the wealthy down to a level thats sensible a income and relaunch the tax money in impact areas like education and research. The people can do it, but not with the team we have now in place, like people in charge like Nancy Polosi and her friends, these people and their ideas are the problem.
8 agree | 9 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
what ever happened to free parking?
12 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
What are the Burlingame citizens complaining about? Parking lot on Park ave. $1.00 for 10 hours...come to SF.......
8 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Carl said:
Come to San Francisco. Most of the meters have a time limit displayed behind scratched plastic you can't read. Guaranteed city govt here wont fix it. Not a major problem to spend city dollars on...unless of course you can't read the time limit display and get a ticket. Oh well. They don't care so why should I. I NEVER shop in San Francisco. Parking Parking Parking. I do ALL my shopping out of San Francisco. I shop at Kmart and eat at Apple Bees in Redwood City every weekend. Try it. You'll like it. Friendlier workers, no parking issues, better prices, no crowd rush, and yes the wonderful smart parking meters. Gotta love it. "Anywhere But San Francisco"
9 agree | 8 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I love your writing style.
9 agree | 9 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
GREAT JOB KEEP up the awesome work
6 agree | 6 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
On two separate occassions the meters did not work. The first time it took my money and did not deliver a receipt. The second time it took some of my money, spit out some and did not register some, but kept it. On the first occassion the authority said they would refund my money, but it has been over a month and I have received nothing. I'm waiting for a response to the second incident but not holding my breath
257 agree | 220 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
"This is classic SF Progressive oppression of the poor. By not requiring below market rate units to provide parking, it makes life harder for the poor living there to have the same convenience regarding their cars as everyone else expects." WRONG--this measure will reduce the cost of apartments by $50,000-$80,000. That's a big chunk of change, especially for the poor, and above all for those who can't afford cars in the first place. Why should the government FORCE you to buy a parking space when you don't want one? All this rule is give you FREEDOM OF CHOICE.
190 agree | 202 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
Right on Tom, poor people don't drive so why not take away their parking. You progressives give me the creeps. The minimum is ONE parking space for every FOUR units of housing and you want to take that away. Tom, you and Peskin need to Get A LIFE! I bet that Mr. Peskin has at least 2 parking spaces in his million dollar condo in Nothe Beach. Leave us alone!!!
203 agree | 209 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
This is classic SF Progressive oppression of the poor. By not requiring below market rate units to provide parking, it makes life harder for the poor living there to have the same convenience regarding their cars as everyone else expects. It makes a hard life still harder. Sad.
194 agree | 223 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
I have been in Baltimore for the last 5 years. I have a disability, because of which my lower limbs are paralyzed. Recently, I have found a spurt in disability tags for parking in the last couple of years. I surveyed 7 vehicles on Redwood street, and found five had disabled tag!!! I have found that some young people in early 20s park their vehicle and walk 5 blocks without any trouble, and I on a wheelchair is unable to get a parking place. Sometimes it has been frustrating. The cops cannot do anything, as long as these disability tags certified indiscriminately by family physicians. Unfortunately, carrying a "illegal" disabled tags no longer is a social stigma. It has become as acceptable as illegal license. I hope, this letter brings some sense of morality and social responsibility to those people using disabled tags. They should understand the hardship they are causing to the disabled community. Regards, Jeremy
349 agree | 375 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
kilteddude said:
Does this mean they will stop ticketing legally parked cars? I've got 2 tickets in the last year while parked legally.
358 agree | 339 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Examiner Reader said:
DAMN IT!
367 agree | 354 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree
Ticket Amnesty said:
Ticket fines in Baltimore are absurd....so, don't pay them. Request and officer when you go to court for your ticket+fines and if he/she doesn't show (they rarely, if ever will) you only have to pay the fine + court costs....goodbye $800 fine on $21 ticket.
650 agree | 377 disagree
Vote on this comment: I agree or I disagree