Parking Measures Have a Lot at Stake

0
Parking Measures Have a Lot at Stake
Bedford Drive lot in Beverly Hills.

A voter initiative to expand free parking might sound like a sure and simple matter. But in Beverly Hills, the idea has led to competing ballot measures, intense lobbying and an unusual lawsuit filed by the city against its own clerk.

The clash finds city officials trying to outmaneuver a group of businesses led by G&L Realty Corp., a Beverly Hills company that owns five medical office buildings in the city. G&L has spent more than $100,000 to place a measure on the March municipal ballot that mandates two hours free parking at city lots.

Beverly Hills isn’t keen on letting go of the parking revenue, so it has taken a two-pronged approach in the face of the measure’s popularity: It filed a legal challenge to the measure and created its own ballot measure that would provide three hours free parking – but to residents only.

“It’s extraordinarily rare in California for a city to file a pre-election challenge,” said Harvey Englander, a noted political consultant hired to orchestrate G&L’s campaign for the initiative. “We just don’t understand why the City Council doesn’t want the voters to vote on this.”

The response from Councilman John Mirisch at a council meeting last week: “The self-serving G&L initiative has one goal and one goal only, which is to provide government-subsidized funding to benefit a private developer and to create an unfunded mandate.”

Beverly Hills is already generous with its parking. Some free parking is available in most of its public lots. Of 13 nonmetered city-owned lots, seven offer two hours of free parking before 6 p.m. Five others provide one hour free, and one is pay as you go. The G&L-supported initiative would establish two hours free parking in 11 of the 13, and expand it into the evening.

G&L’s tenants and other local businesses want more free parking for their clients and customers, but the city may not be in a position to afford it. Like other cities, Beverly Hills has struggled to stay out of the red during the downturn. Officials have cut $27 million from the budget in the last two years, and claim the two-hour parking initiative would cost it $1.3 million annually.

Last week, officials put their own measure on the same March 8 ballot. It would guarantee three hours of free parking during daytime hours at 12 of the 13 lots, but only for Beverly Hills residents. And instead of extending free parking during evening hours, evening rates would be cut by 50 percent. It is expected to cost the city $400,000 in lost revenue annually.

Finding support

It isn’t the first time G&L has inserted itself into city politics. Last year, it was one of many local businesses to successfully campaign against Measure P, which would have raised certain business taxes in Beverly Hills.

The company also found itself debating city officials earlier this year on the benefits of medical offices, in light of a proposal to limit new medical office space. G&L said it has no plans to develop new offices, but commissioned a study that touted the positive economic effect of the health services sector in Beverly Hills.

G&L’s latest campaign was awakened this summer when the city’s Traffic and Parking Commission recommended getting rid of free parking at a Bedford Drive city parking structure, one of the busiest in Beverly Hills. The City Council didn’t follow the recommendation, but the company wasn’t placated.

G&L’s five buildings, which contain medical tenants with patients who come and go, are clustered around the Bedford lot, which only offers one hour free.

The company owns three parking lots in the area, including one stand-alone garage, totaling 689 parking spaces. It charges a maximum of $14.50 for two or more hours, so clients and customers often use the free parking at the city lot. Other area businesses also benefit from free parking at the Bedford.

G&L decided to take matters into its own hands. In addition to Englander’s firm, it hired a law firm to draft an initiative and another consulting firm to gather signatures to put it on the ballot. Unsurprisingly, the drive quickly found support among residents as well as businesses eager for any competitive advantage over neighboring shopping districts. New allies include Marcia Caden, a local resident who has run a jewelry business in the city for more than three decades and is one of the initiative’s sponsors.

“I told them I would do anything they need me to do to support this issue,” said Caden, whose business is on Camden Drive near a city lot offering one-hour free parking. Businesses generally favor the G&L proposal, she added, because it would help lure shoppers from everywhere, not just from other areas of Beverly Hills.

By September, proponents gathered more than 2,600 signatures, well over the 10 percent of registered city voters required for a ballot measure. Englander said the campaign to get the measure on the ballot has so far cost $108,000.

But officials claim the parking initiative is improperly written. After both the city clerk and council approved G&L’s measure for the March ballot, officials challenged it in court, naming City Clerk Byron Pope and Caden as defendants. Officials claim the initiative is illegal in part because rather than act as an ordinance itself, it instructs the council to enact legislation. The lawsuit it set to be heard Jan. 4.

Pope was away at a conference and unavailable for comment last week.

Officials quickly followed the lawsuit with their competing measure, which they describe as a win-win for the city and residents wanting free parking. Officials said G&L is really waging the campaign over one parking lot – the Bedford location that essentially services all of the company’s buildings.

“This is just about the parking next to their businesses on Bedford,” Mayor Jimmy Delshad said. “They want to make sure we don’t charge for two hours for their customers and patients.”

Parking issues

Free parking and politics have mixed before in Beverly Hills.

In 2007, Delshad and Councilwoman Nancy Krasne won election running on a free parking platform, beating out then-Mayor Steve Webb, who opposed two hours of free parking. That year, Delshad and Krasne led a successful effort to establish two hours of free parking in a majority of city lots. Though Delshad and his colleagues have pledged to retain what free parking there is in the city, they are opposed to the expansion proposed by G&L.

The Beverly Hills Chamber of Commerce has yet to weigh in on the competing measures and will likely take up the issue in a January meeting, said Anita Zusman Eddy, vice president of economic development and government affairs.

Caden said two hours is needed for Beverly Hills to stay competitive with shopping districts in places such as Santa Monica, West Hollywood and Century City.

“It is a tremendous asset to the merchants,” she said. “I know it’s a little thing, but if you have the choice of going some place where it’s free or where it’s $5 to $15, I personally am going to go where it’s free.”

Still, neither Santa Monica nor West Hollywood offers as much free parking. In Santa Monica, two free hours is offered at eight downtown lots out of 28 citywide. West Hollywood does not offer free parking at any of its lots.

Earlier this year, Santa Monica rejected a recommendation to eliminate free parking in city lots, mainly because competitors such as Beverly Hills still offer it. In fact, the Beverly Hills conflict has attracted attention from Santa Monica.

“All the Westside cities keep up on what the others are doing and make sure they’re not out of line with the market,” said Don Patterson, Santa Monica’s business and revenue operations manager. “We’re definitely watching what’s happening in Beverly Hills right now.”

No posts to display