Policy

It has been said that adults do not need to be taught what to think they should be taught, but rather how to think.  How does this apply to the parking and mobility industry?  My answer would be significantly!  We all employ adults, whether part-time or full-time, that need to be onboarded and be expected to work independently.  Often these are the very people that make the difference between out one star and five-star ratings. Adults should be approached in a different way than children and we manage parking considerations for adults.  When we are onboarding new employees, we often don't take the concept of education into account.  We tend to think about training.  This approach may have worked well when most parking was  gate controlled and paid for in cash.  Today's parking patron expects so much more.  Not only do they expect a wide variety of services and payment options, but they also expect the people servicing them will have a higher level of technological understanding.  The industry continues to evolve to more reliance on technology. Managers would be wise to invest some time in their orientation programs.  Standing in front of a group of new employees and asking them to recite facts or memorize policy manuals.  I suggest that the social experiences that an employee has encountered allow them to observe other students' attitudes toward information and successfully emulate good practices through dialogue and observation. We are really in business for two reasons, customer service and problem solving.  As professionals, we (and our staff) need to be good at both. I will continue this discussion in my next blog. Scott Rohde, PECP, PTMP,  is the Director of Public Safety for Wesleyan Office of Public Safety. Scott can be reached at srohde@wesleyan.edu.

The parking and mobility industry has never had a soundtrack—until now. Mobility Fever Dream, the debut concept album by Brooke Krieger, drops October 24, 2025, on all major streaming platforms. Created as a cultural time capsule, the album transforms the language, challenges, and humor of modern mobility into a fast-paced, satirical, and surprisingly human musical experience. Divided into four acts, Mobility Fever Dream explores everything from the relentless pace of conferences and RFP cycles to the tech-fueled evolution of AI, EV, and AV integration in our cities. The sound stretches across pop, hip-hop, country, and even K-pop—because the mobility space, like the album, refuses to fit neatly into one category. “This project started as a joke between colleagues about how wild our industry has become,” says Krieger. “But the more I thought about it, the more I realized: the mobility industry is art in motion. It deserves to be heard as much as it’s seen.” A Four-Act Journey Through the Industry’s Chaos With track titles like “Buyout Season,” “The Parking King (RIP Donald Shoup),” “Curbside Hero,” and “Free Parking? Babe, That’s So 2003,” the album blends wit and insight—offering a rhythm-driven reflection on automation, open-market innovation, and the culture of parking itself. Each act mirrors a stage of the industry’s evolution: Act I: The Fever Dream — The nonstop world of trade shows, funding rounds, and caffeine-fueled innovation. Act II: The Streets — Where policy, enforcement, and the human side of parking collide. Act III: The System Reloads — Technology, apps, and automation take center stage. Act IV: The Vision — A nod to the future we’re building—connected, autonomous, and a little bit chaotic. And as a bonus track, the album closes where it all began: “Artificial Intention”—a sultry nod to our industry’s collective fascination with artificial intelligence and automation. Satire, Sound, and the Soul of a Sector Released under Curb Culture Media, Mobility Fever Dream isn’t just an album—it’s a mirror. It celebrates the dreamers, engineers, planners, operators, and innovators who make cities more livable every day. “I wanted to create something that makes people in this space laugh, nod, and think, ‘Yep, that’s us,’” says Krieger. “Because behind every citation, every app, every RFP—there’s a story worth singing.” Mobility Fever Dream challenges how we talk about mobility, reminding us that the future isn’t just about infrastructure—it’s about imagination. Listen for Yourself Stream “Mobility Fever Dream” everywhere October 24, 2025.

How does parking policy align with the goals of a growing, multimodal city? And how can cities densify without overwhelming their parking systems? These questions have been central in Columbus, Ohio—the Midwest’s fastest-growing city. 2024 was pivotal. In November, Central Ohio voters approved a new transit sales tax to fund a Bus Rapid Transit system. Months earlier, Columbus City Council adopted Phase 1 of “Zone In,” a zoning overhaul creating new districts to spur housing and walkable, transit-oriented development. A major feature: eliminating minimum parking requirements in these new districts. In recent years, cities like Minneapolis, Austin, and Denver have repealed parking minimums to support affordability and transit-oriented growth. Yet, as any parking professional knows, residents are often vocal about street parking access. Columbus was no exception. In response, the City established a new Parking Impact Study process, giving the Division of Mobility and Parking Services authority to evaluate potential spillover from new developments. Studies document on-street occupancies, estimate demand, and determine whether mitigation is needed. If impacts are modest, projects commit to Transportation Demand Management (TDM) measures—such as subsidized transit passes, carshare, rideshare, or bike/scooter share—that reduce driving needs. Larger impacts trigger layered mitigations plus a parking management fee, designed to fund new permit zones or other operational tools to protect neighborhood parking access. One year in, only a handful of projects have required studies, and none have yet triggered fees. Still, the policy is already considered a win. Columbus successfully removed parking barriers to new housing—an urgent priority for city leadership—while establishing safeguards to protect residents and manage curb demand. The Columbus model may not fit every city, but its lesson is broader: parking concerns need not block goals around housing affordability or transit-oriented development. With creativity and community dialogue, parking can shift from being a barrier to becoming part of the solution. Justin Goodwin, AICP, PTMP, is the Mobility and Parking Services Administrator for the City of Columbus. Justin can be reached at jmgoodwin@columbus.gov.

Does the Benefit Justify the Cost?

Policy Building Blocks to Shift the Curbside and Parking Operational Framework

Accepting payments, both digital and traditional, in ungated parking environments is commonplace in all parking markets. Traditional notions of payment acceptance become more complicated in new, ungated environments due to the still-evolving regulatory and legal environments. Most reputable ungated service firms will indeed indemnify and protect their operators and landlords from many (not all) of these challenges, but that doesn’t mean the landlord doesn’t have affirmative duties in the ecosystem to uphold. The webinar, article, and white paper, “Ungated Environments: Best Practices for Parking Payment Providers,” aim to unpack the still-developing, complex, and detailed expectations that form the foundation of the modern parking environment. Improper signage (content and style), misalignment between digital and traditional payment methods, lack of consistent policies and processes, misleading consumer journeys, and more are just some of the concerns that this webinar/article/whitepaper seeks to educate on. As authors, we are pleased to share our knowledge and experience with the parking, transportation, and mobility community, much of which was gained through extensive observation of trial and error while operating downstream of all parking operators, landlords, payment providers, and other relevant stakeholders conducting business in a parking facility. Click here to read the Parking & Mobility magazine article. Click here to read the white paper. Click here to purchase and watch the webinar. Michael J. Drow, PTMP, is the CEO of PRRS, Inc. He can be reached at mdrow@prrsparking.com. Todd Tucker, PTMP, is the COO for PRRS, Inc. He can be reached at ttucker@prrsparking.com.

California’s Vehicle Code, which sets the rules for driving and stopping vehicles throughout the state, has tens of thousands of sections. Not surprisingly, some of those sections are relics of the time they were adopted, and do not reflect the evolution—or even allow the use—of new technologies. One example is Section 22508(e).  Until December 31, 2024, this section required cities to use physical parking meters or pay stations if they wanted to charge for on-street parking.  Thanks to SB 532, sponsored by State Senator Scott Wiener, three cities (Santa Monica, Long Beach, and San Francisco) may now pilot paid parking without a physical meter or pay station.  https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billNavClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240SB532.  In the last few years, mobile and online payment have exploded for products from coffee to concert tickets to car insurance.  More than 16% of all retail products are purchased online today, an increase from around 7% ten years ago.  https://ycharts.com/indicators/us_ecommerce_sales_as_percent_retail_sales. And according to a November 2024 report from the Pew Research Center: “The vast majority of Americans – 98% – now own a cellphone of some kind,” and 91% own a smart phone.  https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/fact-sheet/mobile/.  SB 532 reflects the reality of how payments are made in 2025, and allows cities in California to keep up with the private sector—not to mention other cities around the country (like Doral, Florida and Columbus, Ohio) that offer mobile-only parking payment zones.  And it does all this while respecting California values, requiring an “Equitable and Accessible Parking Cash Payment Plan” to ensure non-mobile phone users have a way to pay with cash. Allowing cities to modernize their payment systems saves money on infrastructure purchase and maintenance.  Meters and pay stations are expensive to procure and keep in good working order, and can be targets for vandalism and fraud.  While meters and pay stations may ultimately prove to be an indispensable part of an equitable and robust on-street parking payment system, allowing cities to experiment with modern technology can only lead to improvements for customers and the public.  It will be fascinating to see how SB 532’s three pilot cities (and others that may be added) exercise this new opportunity.  And the answers will come sooner than we think: their pilot authority expires in 2033. Hank Willson is a Parking Policy Manager for the City and County of San Francisco, California (SFMTA). Hank can be reached at Hank.Willson@sfmta.com.  

The IPMI Policy & Legislative Cohort administered a survey aimed at identifying the most pressing industry policy topics.  Among the top issues are policies around new technologies that could revolutionize parking management by reducing friction. One of the highest friction points in an operation is the ability to consistently facilitate curbside compliance, aka parking enforcement.  As curbside demands have exponentially increased, the parking enforcement tools in our policy toolbox have generally remained the same. I’m not here to write about the legislative barriers to reduce friction in the parking enforcement process (there are many) or the growing number of case studies of cities that have embarked on their automated enforcement journey (that number is growing).  What I’m here to write about today are the policies that your organization should be thinking about when you are able to reduce the friction in your parking enforcement process and move towards automated enforcement.  Before we begin, what do I mean by automated enforcement.  For the purposes of this discussion, automated enforcement is the ability to utilize fixed or mobile camera technology to identify a parking violation and process that parking violation without placing a parking citation on the violating vehicle. Imagine for a minute your organization has the legislative ability to implement automated enforcement.  Would you be able to implement by the end of the week, month, year?  Here are just a few policy topics your organization should think about when moving towards automated enforcement: Violation Types – does it makes sense to automate enforcement for all violation types? Are there more severe safety related parking violations that should be prioritized for an initial rollout of automated enforcement? Payment/Appeal Deadlines – mailing a parking citation to a registered owner adds time to the notification process. Do your payment and appeal deadlines need to shift to accommodate this new process? Violation Fine Structure – cities that have implemented automated enforcement have seen citation issuance increase exponentially. Knowing this may occur, are there opportunities to revise the fine structure for certain violations? This may be an opportunity to introduce first-time warnings, early payment discounts, or progressive pricing for repeat violators. Don’t get me wrong, the legislative framework to allow for automated enforcement is a top priority to enable your organization to leverage new and emerging parking enforcement technologies.  Equally as important is your policy framework for administering an automated enforcement program. Policies matter, and when developed in a comprehensive manner can lead to long-term success for your operation.  Let’s keep the conversation going on Forum Online Community and the dedicated “Policy and Legislation” community. Robert Ferrin, PTMP is a Mobility & Parking Senior Project Manager with Kimley-Horn & Associates, Inc. and is serving his third term on the IPMI Board of Directors.  Robert can be reached at robert.ferrin@kimley-horn.com.

In this joint roundtable between IPMI and the British Parking Association (BPA), we will discuss the similarities and differences between higher education parking in North America and Great Britain and what can be learned from the experiences of both.

Change is inevitable, and when it comes to regulation, standing on the sidelines means accepting whatever comes your way—whether favorable or not. The universe abhors a vacuum, and if industry professionals don’t step in to help shape legislation, other forces will fill the gap, often without the insight needed to create balanced, effective policies. Last month, in a message to members of the Legislative Cohort Committee, Mark Vergenes shared an example of how the Pennsylvania Parking Association (PTAP) interacted with the Pennsylvania legislature to advocate for changes in parking enforcement laws. His message was clear: Active participation in the legislative process is essential. With over 15 years of experience in legislative affairs, I can confidently say: Legislators value input from their constituents. Your voice matters. If you’re not in the room, you’re not at the table. Lawmakers don’t intentionally exclude interested parties, but without active participation, your expertise is missing from the conversation. You have knowledge that can guide policymakers. Legislators will rely on industry experts to understand the real-world impact of their decisions. Regulation is increasing. Across the country, new laws are being passed to address concerns about industry practices, often based on the actions of a small percentage of bad actors. Without industry guidance, well-intentioned regulations may have unintended consequences. Advocacy requires patience and repetition. A single conversation isn’t enough—consistent, collective engagement through industry groups or associations is far more effective than a lone voice. Silence is costly. If you choose to remain uninvolved, you’ll have to live with the results, and when it comes to regulation, the outcome may not be in your favor. State-led regulatory efforts are gaining momentum and could significantly alter long-standing industry practices. While some legislation may have good intentions, lawmakers often lack the technical understanding of how their decisions affect businesses. That’s where industry experts play a vital role in educating policymakers and shaping regulations that are both fair and practical. We should collectively advocate for laws that promote good public policy. That means considering both the intended and unintended consequences of legislation. Moreover, when laws adopt industry practices, they provide legal protections against class action lawsuits and other litigation against the industry. Proactive engagement isn’t just about preventing bad laws—it’s about ensuring that industry standards are codified in a way that provides stability and clarity. Change is coming. The question is: will you help direct it, or will you be steamrolled by it? To ensure a fair and responsible regulatory environment, industry professionals must actively participate, educate, and advocate for balanced land fair legislation. Join the conversation. Share your insights. Your engagement is crucial. Scott A. Petri is the President for Mobility & Parking Advisors, LLC. Scott can be reached at Scott@mobilityparkingadvisors.com.

The homelessness crisis in America is real and has far-reaching economic and community impacts. Parking and mobility owners and operators are facing issues on both the operations and enforcement fronts, from people sleeping outside in and around the garages to those seeking shelter in automobiles using parking garages and lots as places to sleep for the night or longer to stay safe.

As a member of the IPMI Policy & Legislative Task Force, our cohort provides strategic guidance and recommendations on policies and regulations impacting the parking and mobility industry. As part of our initiatives that inform policymakers, stakeholders, and the public on effective strategies for improving urban mobility through well-planned parking policies, we are sharing this example from Pennsylvania to demonstrate specific advocacy efforts. In Pennsylvania, updating state laws that govern parking in cities of the 1st, 2nd, 2A, and 3rd classes has been a long-standing challenge. With 56 municipalities classified as cities, each with its own regulations, navigating legislative reform is no small feat. To streamline advocacy efforts, the Pennsylvania Parking Association (PTAP) is taking inspiration from the California Parking Association, which has spent over 25 years championing the parking industry. With the help of a seasoned advocacy firm, PTAP members will receive timely legislative updates and have access to resources that amplify their voices in policy discussions. This coordinated effort ensures fair regulations, increased revenue opportunities, and improved city parking management. Past Success and Future Goals In 2017-2018, PTAP successfully advocated for legislation allowing Cities of the 3rd class to adjudicate parking tickets outside of District Justice courts. This change streamlined payment processing, improved offender experience, and alleviated court backlogs. For 2025, PTAP’s Advocacy Committee has identified three key priorities: Front-Facing License Plates – Pennsylvania is one of only 20 states that do not mandate front-facing plates. Implementing this requirement will enhance license plate recognition (LPR) technology for efficient enforcement. Red Light & Speed Cameras Operated by Parking Authorities – Expanding automated enforcement, similar to successful programs in Philadelphia, can improve safety, reduce court congestion, and generate municipal revenue. State-Backed Enforcement of Unpaid Fines – PTAP is advocating for policies that allow for registration holds and driver’s license censure for unpaid citations, ensuring accountability and compliance. Recent Advocacy Efforts PTAP leaders have actively participated in legislative discussions, meeting with policymakers to advocate for meaningful reform. On May 3, 2023, they engaged with the PA House and Senate Transportation Committees to discuss policy priorities. Nearly a year later, on May 1, 2024, PTAP representatives and industry experts provided testimony at the Senate Transportation Committee Hearing. Most recently, on June 11, 2024, they held a virtual meeting with PennDOT to explore enforcement mechanisms for unpaid fines. Join the Movement As cities and municipalities set their own agendas, having a dedicated advocacy firm ensures that parking and transportation priorities remain in focus. By uniting behind a common goal, PTAP members can drive legislative success, making parking more efficient and equitable across Pennsylvania. As the saying goes, when the tide rises, all boats rise—and with PTAP’s advocacy efforts, Pennsylvania’s parking future looks brighter than ever. IPMI members, be sure to sign up for our open community on Forum, the Policy and Legislation Community to find out more, start discussions, and hear how IPMI members are effectively using policy to streamline their operations. Mark A. Vergenes is a consultant for Mirus Consultants. Mark can be reached at mark@mirusconsultants.com.