Agenda Item 6A
March 4,2014
Action
MEMORANDUM
February 28, 2014
TO:
County Council
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Regulations
Robert H. Drummer, Senior Legislative Attorney
p;;;j
Environment
Committee
Action:
Bill 32-13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Off-Street Public Parking
Plug-in Vehicles
Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy, and
recommendation (3-0): enact the Bill with amendments.
Bill 32-13, Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Off-Street Public Parking Regulations Plug-in
Vehicles, sponsored by Councilmembers Riemer, Berliner, Andrews, and Council Vice President
Leventhal, was introduced on December 10. A public hearing was held on January 28 and a
Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee worksession was held on
February 24.
Background
Bill 32-13 would prohibit parking of a non-plug-in vehicle in an off-street parking space
reserved for plug-in vehicles that is open to the public. Plug-in vehicle parking spaces with a
recharging station are becoming more popular as plug-in electric vehicles become more available
in the County. There is currently no prohibition on parking a non plug-in vehicle in a parking
space reserved for a plug-in electric vehicle.
Although property owners have posted signs prohibiting parking a non plug-in vehicle in
a parking space reserved for a plug-in electric vehicle, the Police cannot issue a parking citation
without a law prohibiting this. This Bill would permit the Police to issue a parking citation for a
violation and thereby encourage parking lot owners to install parking spaces with a recharging
station reserved for plug-in vehicles. A violation would be a Class B Violation under County
Code §31 1 with a maximum penalty of $100 for an initial offense. The actual fine would be
set by Council resolution under Code §2-57
A.
The availability of recharging stations in the
County should encourage the use of plug-in electric vehicles.
Public Hearing
The lone speaker at the January 28 public hearing, Lanny Hartmann, supported the Bill
with amendments. See ©4. We also received written testimony supporting the Bill with
amendments from Charlie Garlow, President of the Electric Vehicle Association of Greater
Washington D.C. (©7) and Bob Bruninga (©8). Each of these speakers recommended
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
modifying the definition of a plug-in electric vehicle to include a vehicle that has been converted
from a gasoline vehicle and a vehicle with a maximum speed less than 65 miles per hour.
T
&
E Committee Worksession
Art Holmes, DOT, Al Roshdieh, DOT, and William Siebert, DOT, represented the.
Executive Branch at the Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee
worksession on February
24.
The Committee reviewed the Bill and the amendments proposed
by Councilmember Riemer. The Committee recommended (3-0) approval of the Bill with the
amendments to include converted vehicles and to lower the required maximum speed from 65
mph to 55 mph.
Issues
1.
Should the definition of a plug-in electric vehicle exclude a vehicle that has been
converted to an electric vehicle after its original date of manufacture?
The Bill would limit the definition of plug-in electric vehicle to a vehicle that "has not
been modified from the original manufacturer's specifications." See line 7-8 on ©2. This
provision was included in the Bill to match the definition of a plug-in electric vehicle in a State
Bill (HB 1149) that would have similarly prohibited parking a non plug-in electric vehicle in a
parking space with a vehicle recharging station. However, in
2013,
the General Assembly
enacted a revised definition of a plug-in electric vehicle that expressly includes a vehicle that has
been modified from its original manufacturer specifications. See Md. Transportation Code § 11­
145.1 at ©9.
All 3 members of the public testifying on this Bill pointed out that there are many former
gasoline vehicles that have been successfully converted to a plug-in electric vehicle that would
be prohibited from using a recharging station in a public parking lot by this Bill. The purpose of
the Bill is to encourage the use of plug-in electric vehicles. Although it may be more difficult for
a property owner or a police officer to recognize a converted plug-in electric vehicle, excluding
them would discourage the use of these plug-in electric vehicles. For this reason, the lead
sponsor of the Bill, Councilmember Riemer, proposed an amendment that would modify the
definition of a plug-in electric vehicle to match the current State definition in §11-145.1.
Committee recommendation (3-0): amend the Bill to include converted vehicles.
2. Should the definition of a plug-in electric vehicle be limited to a vehicle with a maximum
speed of at least 65 miles per hour?
The Bill would limit the definition of plug-in electric vehicle to a vehicle with a
maximum speed of 65 miles per hour. Again, this definition was pulled from HB 1149. The
current definition in Md. Transportation Code § 11-145.1 requires a maximum speed of 55 miles
per hour. Reducing the maximum speed was recommended by each of the members of the
public who commented on the Bill. Although there are neighborhood plug-in electric vehicles
with a maximum speed as low as 25 miles per hour, the State law definition requires a maximum
speed of 55 miles per hour. Councilmember Riemer's proposed amendment would modify the
definition of a plug-in electric vehicle to match the current State definition in §11-145.1.
2
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Committee recommendation (3-0):
amend the Bill to lower the maximum required speed from
65 miles per hour to 55 miles per hour.
This packet contains:
Bill 32-13
Legislative Request Report
Testimony Lanny Hartmann
Written comments from Lanny Hartmann
Written comments from Charlie Garlow
Written comments from Bob Bruninga
Md. Transportation Code
§11-145.l
Fiscal and Economic Impact statement
Circle #
1
3
4
of
5
7
8
9
10
f:\LAW\B1LLS\1332 Off-Street Parking - Plug-In Vehicles\Action Memo.Doc
3
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Bill No.
32-13
Concerning: Motor Vehicles and Traffic ­
Off-Street Public Parking Regulations
- Plug-in Vehicles
Revised: February 27, 2014 Draft No.£
Introduced:
December 10, 2013
Expires:
June 10, 2015
Enacted: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Executive: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Effective: _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ __
Sunset Date:
_N:...:.o:::.:.n~e,-:----:~
_ _ __
Ch. _ _, Laws of Mont. Co. _ __
COUNTY COUNCIL
FOR MONTGOMERY COUNTY, MARYLAND
By: Councilmembers Riemer, Berliner, Andrews, and Vice President Leventhal
AN
ACT to:
(1)
(2)
(3)
define a plug-in vehicle;
prohibit parking of a vehicle that is not a plug-in vehicle in a public parking space
reserved for plug-in vehicles; and
generally amend the laws governing off-street public parking in the County.
By adding
Montgomery County Code
Chapter 31, Motor Vehicles and Trafflc
Article IV, Off-Street Public Parking Regulations
Section 31-26B
Boldface
Underlining
[Single boldface brackets]
Double underlining
[[Double boldface bracketsD
* * *
Heading or defined term.
Added to existing law by original bill.
Deletedfrom existing law by original bill.
Added by amendment.
Deletedfrom existing law or the bill by amendment.
Existing law unaffected by bill.
The County Council for Montgomery County, Maryland approves the following Act:
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
BILL
No. 32-13
1
2
Sec. 1. Section 31-26B is added as follows:
31-26B. Parking spaces reserved for
!.
plug-in vehicle.
3
4
ill
In this Section,
~plug-in
vehicle
means
~
vehicle that:
5
6
ill
ill
ill
illll
is made
Qy
~
vehicle manufacturer;
is manufactured L'!rimarily for use on g L'!ublic street, road, and
highway;
[[has not been modified from the original manufacturer's
sL'!ecificati ons;
has
~
7
8
9
10
11
12
rated unloaded gross vehicle weight of no more than 8,500
pounds;
[[ill]]
ill
[[(Q)]]
ill
has g maximum speed capability of at least [[65]] 55 miles
per hour; and
is propelled to g significant extent
Qy
an electric motor that
~
13
14
15
draws electricity from
battery that:
~
CA)
for g 4-wheeled vehicle, has
kilowatt-hours;
capacity of at least
.1
16
17
18
em
(Q
for
~
2-wheeled or
~
3-wheeled vehicle, has
~
capacity of at
least 2.5 kilowatt-hours; and
can be recharged from an external source of electricity.
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
®
(£)
Plug-in vehicle includes a qualifying vehicle that has been modified
from the original manufacturer's specifications.
A person may not stop, stand, or park
vehicle in
~
space that:
~
vehicle that is not
~
plug-in
ill
ill
is marked for the use of plug-in vehicles with an official
§ign
that
conforms to regulations adopted pursuant to Section 31-23; and
provides access to
~
plug-in vehicle recharging station.
26
@-
f:\lawlbills\1332 off-street parking - plug-in vehicleslbill4.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
LEGISLATIVE REQUEST REPORT
Motor Vehicles and Traffic
DESCRIPTION:
Bill 32-l3
Off-Street Public Parking Regulations
Plug-in Vehicles
Bill 32-l3 would prohibit a person from parking a non plug-in
electric vehicle in an off-street public parking space reserved for
plug-in vehicles.
Plug-in vehicle parking spaces with a recharging station are
becoming more popular as plug-in electric vehicles become more
available in the County. There is currently no prohibition on parking
a non plug-in vehicle in a parking space reserved for a plug-in
electric vehicle.
The goal is to encourage the use of plug-in electric vehicles in the
County and the installation of parking spaces with a recharging
station reserved for plug-in vehicles.
Police, County Attorney, Department of Transportation
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be requested.
To be researched.
Robert
H.
Drummer, Senior Legislative Attorney, 240-777-7895
To be researched.
PROBLEM:
GOALS AND
OBJECTIVES:
COORDINATION:
FISCAL IMPACT:
ECONOMIC
IIVIPACT:
EVALUATION:
EXPERIENCE
ELSEWHERE:
SOURCE OF
INFORMATION:
APPLICATION
WITHIN
MUNICIPALITIES:
PENALTIES:
Class B Violation
F:\LAW\BILLS\ 1332 Off-Street Parking - Plug-In Vehicles\LRR.Doc
f:\law\bills\ 1332 off-street parking - plug-in vehicles\lrr.doc
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Lanny Hartmann
7244 Riding Hood Circle
Columbia, MD 21045
lanny3@yahoo.com
January 28,2014
Dear Council Members,
As an owner of a plug-in electric car, a resident of Maryland, and a frequent traveller to Montgomery
County, I urge the Council to pass Bill 32-13 to prohibit parking of a non-plug-in vehicle in a parking space
reserved for plug-in vehicles. Currently there is no law, that I'm aware of, in Maryland that prohibits non­
plug-in vehicles from blocking access to electric vehicle charging stations.
Many times I have been unable to charge my electric car at a public charging station because the spaces
in front of it have been occupied by non plug-in vehicles. This can be very discouraging and I believe it has
a negative effect on the adoption o'f plug-in vehicles in the state and in Montgomery County.
There have been several attempts at legislation on this issue in the Maryland General Assembly that have
not moved forward. The recommendation of the Maryland Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Council on page
32 of its Final Report to the Governor and Maryland General Assembly, is that "action on this issue at the
state level be deferred until local governments and/or market forces have had more opportunity to address
it in ways appropriate to different situations."
This is an opportunity for Montgomery County to take the lead and be the first to address this issue in the
state of Maryland and help encourage more people to drive plug-in electric vehicles.
There are a few recommendations that I detail below.
Please consider the following changes in order to be consistent with the definition of a plug-in vehicle
speCified in 2013 Maryland Senate Bill 600.
In (a) (5), CHANGE from 65 to 55 miles per hour.
REMOVE (a) (3) has not been modified from the original manufacturer's specifications;
ADD "Plug-in vehicle" includes a qualifying vehicle that has been modified from the original manufacturer
specifications.
I ask you to avoid adding amendments that increase the complexity of compliance and enforcement of the
law. Specifically, I caution against adding any language that states that the qualifying plug-in vehicle must
be plugged in or that it must vacate the parking space upon reaching a full charge. In some public parking
Situations, such as park and ride lots, or when a car is left to charge overnight, it is not practical for the
operator of the plug-in vehicle to vacate the parking space immediately when the car is finished charging.
Also, in some situations, a plug-in vehicle owner will leave a note granting permission to unplug their car if
another person arrives and can park in an adjacent space where the charging cable will reach. An
amendment requiring the car to be plugged in would put at risk the owner of the vehicle who allowed his
car to be unplugged or who was the victim of someone maliciously or innocently unplugging the owner's
car without permission.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Lanny Hartmann
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Drummer, Bob
From:
Sent:
Lanny H [Janny3@hotmail.com]
Monday, January
27,201411 :50
AM
Drummer, Bob
Comments on Bill 32-13
To:
Subject:
Dear Mr. Drummer,
Below are the comments that I believe were incorporated in a revision to 2012 Maryland House Bill 108.
Some Maryland residents have taken gasoline cars and converted them to run on batteries. Being that they
modified their cars to run on electric power rather than petroleum fuel, the following sentence would exclude
them:
(3) has not been modified from original manufacturer's specifications;
May I suggest a change that would preserve the intent of the bill while not inadvertently excluding vehicles
that have been modified to be genuine plug-in electric vehicles. The following wording should be changed.
FROM:
(1) is made by a vehicle manufacturer;
TO:
(1) is made by a vehicle manufacturer or has been converted to electric;
ELIMINATE:
(3) has not been modified from original manufacturer's specifications;
Also, I believe that "(5) has a maximum speed of at least 65 miles per hour," was changed to be consistent
with the Maryland motor vehicle code.
lanny Hartmann
410-419-2774
1
®
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Drummer, Bob
From:
Sent:
Lanny Hartmann [lanny3@yahoo.com]
Thursday, January 30,2014 12:50 PM
Riemer, Hans; Drummer, Bob
Notes on Bill 32-13
4hrchargingsign.jpg
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dear Councilmember Riemer.
Thank you lor sponsoring BHl32-13 and listening to my testimony at the public comment session this week. I am pleased that Montgomery County is taking the lead on addressing this
issue which is important to the growing number of plug-in vehicle drivers and Ihe property owners that provide public charging stations.
I would like to pass along to you and Mr. Drummer some additional information that may be helpful.
The Fiscal and Policy Note on 2013 Marvland HB 1149 refers to the Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Council Report that I mentioned in my testimony. "The report recommend that action on
this issue be deferred until local governments and/or market forces have had more opportunity to address the nuanced issues involved. These issues included the amount of time that an
electric vehicle should be allowed to be plugged-in to a charger and whether the amount of time should vary for parking spaces located on different types of properties."
That part of the report is found on page 32. Here is a !,.inkl<L(!1e
2Q12
E.ll!.Q.Fin;ll..fu!.l1Q.(j.
With regard to the amount of time that a vehicle should be allowed
to
remain plugged in at a charging station, I believe that market forces, in the form of a tiered pricing structure. are
preferred over legislation. This is already being used successfully in a number of charging station locations in Montgomery County. I have attached a photo of a sign that exhibits an
example of this pricing model that. in and of itself. discourages plug-in vehicles from remaining at a charging station more than a few hours. In this particular example, the sign designates
the price as $.55 per hour forthe first 4 hours and $1.00 per hour after 4 hours.
This charging station is at The Tower Building on Wootton Parkway in
Rockville.
I am available to answer questions or help in any way to get this bill passed.
Sincerely,
Lanny Hartmann
phone; 410-419-2774
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Drummer,
Bob
From:
Sent:
Lauer, Linda
Friday, January
31,201412:30
PM
Drummer, Bob
FW: Bli
32-13
Written testimony
To:
Subject:
You may have seen this, but just in case.
From:
Charlie Garlow [mailto:charliegarlow350@gmail.com]
Sent:
Thursday, January 30, 20145:22 PM
To:
Lauer, Linda
Cc:
Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
Subject:
Bil 32-13 Written testimony
Dear Council member Leventhal,
Thanks for co-sponsoring this bill. I hope you will endorse the modifications I propose here.
I'm sorry I missed the hearing.
It
would have been good to see you again.
Dear Ms. Lauer, Clerk of the County Council,
Please enter these comments in the record for Bill 32-13 pertaining to Plug-In Vehicles.
This bill would prohibit parking of a non-plug-in vehicle in parking spots that have been designated for electric
vehicle charging. This is a good bill, but needs some modification.
First, it should not require that the plug-in vehicle is manufactured by an original eq!lipment manufacturer such
as Chevy, Ford, etc. Rather it should allow for any electric car to park and charge. For example, I am the proud
owner of an electric Porsche [Model 914, 1974] which was converted from gasoline.
It
is a great commuter car,
and I see no reason that this bill should discriminate against me or other owners of conversion electric cars. I
have a friend who has a very nice BMW converted to electricity. My friend Chip Gribben from Laurel MD
comes to Montgomery County often. He has a Ford Focus that he converted to electricity. There are more of
these conversions all the time. They look so nice that it would be difficult for a ticketing officer to tell whether
this is an OEM car or not.
Second, although my car can go 80 mph [I try not to get caught !], I see no reason that we should not allow
parking by cars that can not go faster than 65 mph. Why? First, how is a ticketing officer going to know if an
electric vehice can go 65 mph or faster, and thus qualify for charging in a charging spot? Enforcement would be
problematic. Second, there are some very nice vehicles, referred to as neighborhood electric vehicles which
only go 25 mph. Some go faster. They should be allowed to go to the shopping mall and charge up just like the
rest of us. You can see pictures of those that are closed and open shells at this web site.
http://www.ecofriend.com/5-neighborhood-electric-vehicles.html
Thank you,
Charlie Garlow, President, Electric Vehicle Assoc of Greater Washington DC. www.evadc.org
9929 Woodburn Road
Silver Spring, MD 20901
1
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Drummer.
Bob
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
Tuesday, February 18, 2014 12:31 PM
Drummer, Bob
FW: [EVADC Listserve] FW: Electric Vehicles and charging spots in Monty County
Dear Bob, I'm forwarding this to you in case you think it is worth mentioning in the committee packet on this bill.
Best,
George
------,--------------------------------­
From: Robert Bruninga [mailtp:bruninga@usna.edu]
Sent:
Tuesday, January
07, 2014 12:18
PM
To: EVADC@yahoogroups.com
Cc: bruninga@usna.edu; Leventhal's Office, Councilmember
Subject:
RE: [EVADC Listserve]
FW:
Electric Vehicles and charging spots in Monty County
Charlie,
I cannot go to the meeting, but PLEASE email back to these contact individuals and Mr Drummer, that the definition of a
PEV is flawed since it outlaws the market for conversion EV's and that is one of the more vital small business markets of
the EV industry. In fact, it was converted Prius's that got the whole PEV market underway.
There are many companies that will convert almost any make and model of any old gas car to electric for only a few
thousand dollars, far less than the expensive high performance models coming from the established car manufacturers.
There are even senators and congressmen driving converted PEV's. And since gas cars sold today typically have a 20 to
25 year life span before salvage, the market for EV conversions of these fine cars to emission free EV's is huge over the
next 2 decades to get us to the electric transportation baseline we need by 2030.
"has not been modified from the original manufacturer's specifications"
Must not stand!
The sentence
Bob Bruninga, PE
IEEE National Committee on Transportation and Aerospace
Senior Research Engineer, US Naval Academy
410-293-6417
From: EVADC@yghoogroups.com [mailto:EVADC@yahoogroups.com]
On Behalf Of
Garlow, Charlie
Sent:
Tuesday, January
07,2014 10:04
AM
To: evadc@yahoogroups.com
Subject:
[EVADC Ustserve]
FW:
Electric Vehicles and charging spots in Monty County
Does anyone want to step forward and act as our trail boss on this issue? Want to testify on Jan 28 at 1:3)PM?
How about getting something like this going in YOUR county?
My thought is to open it to conversions and to specify that PEV s must be plugged in, whether full or not. That
would eliminate tickets for PEV owners who plug in and then get filled up. Your thoughts?
1
(j)
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
GAM-Article - Transportation, Section 11-145.1
Page 1 of 1
Statute Text
Article· Transportation
§11-145.1.
(a) "Plug-in electric drive vehicle' means a motor vehicle that:
(1) Is made by a manufacturer;
(2) Is manufactured primarily for use on public streets, roads, and highways;
(3) Is rated at not more than 8,500 pounds unloaded gross vehicle weight;
(4) Has a maximum speed capability of at least 55 miles per hour; and
(5) Is propelled to a significant ex1ent by an electric motor that draws electricity from a
battery that:
(i) Has a capacity of not less than 4 kilowatt-hours for 4-wheeled motor vehicles
and not less than 2.5 kilowatt-hours for 2-wheeled or 3-wheeled motor vehicles; and
(ii) Is capable of being recharged from an ex1emal source of electricity.
(b) "Plug-in electric drive vehicle" includes a qualifying vehicle that has been modified from
original manufacturer specifications.
http://mgaleg.maryland.gov/webmgalfnnStatutesText.aspx?article=gtr&section= 11-145.1 ...
2/19/2014
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
-
ROCKVILLE, MARYLAt'm
MEMORANDUM
January 22, 2014
TO:
Craig Rice, President, County Council
FROM:
SUBJECT:
Jennifer A,
of Managem1e.nt and Budget
Joseph F. Beach. Director, Department of
Financ~
Council
Bill 32-13,
Motor Vehicles
and
Traffic Off-Street Public Parking
Regulations, Plug-in Vehicles
Hugh~~
~
Please find attached the fiscal and economic impact statements for the above­
referenced legislation.
JAH:fz
cc: Bonnie Kirkland, Assistant Chief Administrative Officer
Lisa Austin, Offices of the County Executive
Joy Nurmi, Special Assistant to tile County Executive
Patrick Lacefield. Director, Public Information Office
Joseph F. Beach, Director, Department of Finance
Michael Coveyou, Department of finance
Kevin Myers, Department of Finance
Robert Hagedoom, Department of Finance
Arthur Holmes, Director, Department ofTransportation
Brady Goldsm ith, Office of Management and Budget
:'~':
;-)
0
-:::>
: ;:J:n
.)-«
c:
::;z:
--OM
r.;::D
~r.:
......j
:E
.~
:Z:
;::n­
00
--I
·""rtl
N
,J:::
,
!oM
::x:
"..
'9
0
Alex Espinosa, Office of Management
and Budget
Felicia Zhang, Office
of
Management and Budget
Naeem Mia,
Office of
Management
and Budget
-<
-....
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Fiscal Impact
Statement
Council Bill 32-13
Motor Vehicles and Traffic - Off-Street Public Parking Regulations - Plug-in Vehicles
1. Legislative Summary (Enter narrative that explains the purpose of the legislation).
Bill 32-13 would prohibit parking of a vehicle that is not a plug-in vehicle in a public off­
street parking space reserved for plug-in vehicles.
2. An estimate of changes in County revenues and expenditures regardless of whether the
revenues or expenditures are assumed in the recommended or approved budget. Includes
source of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
Estimate minimal change in revenue or expenses.
3. Revenue and expenditure estimates covering at least the next 6 fiscal years.
None in prior years.
4. An actuarial analysis through the entire amortization period for each bill that would affect
retiree pension or group insurance costs.
No affect on PC costs.
5. Later actions that may affect future revenue and expenditures
if
the bill authorizes future
spending.
None anticipated.
6. An estimate of the staff time needed to implement the bill.
None.
7. An explanation of how the addition of new staff responsibilities would affect other duties.
'lbe enforcement of any new law creates some marginal increase of County Police responsibility
and would be prioritized within all law enforcement responsibilities.
8.
An
estimate of costs when an additional appropriation is needed.
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
No additional appropriation anticipated.
9. A description of any variable that could affect revenue and cost estimates.
If enforcement of publicly accessible parking spaces on private property became a significant
problem, there may be a need for additional police officers and some marginal increase in fine
revenue.
10. Ranges of revenue or expenditures that are uncertain or difficult to project.
Even a range cannot be predicted.
II.
If a bill is likely to have no fiscal impact, why that is the case.
The number of statues that could be enforced on private property at publicly accessible parking
spaces is very limited and historically has not been a public safety priority.
12. Other fiscal impacts or comments.
The legislation provides for enforcement through parking citations in the same manner as other
citations are issued as violations of Chapter 31 of the County Code. Lines 21 and 22 suggest that
an official electric vehicle charging station sign will be created pursuant to Section 31·23. This
action would be required for the County Police to be able to enforce the restriction on publicly
accessible parking spaces located on private property. This would be similar to the current
enforcement of ADA reserved parking spaces on private property.
The following contributed to and concurred with this analysis:
Rick Siebert, Chief. Division of Parking Management, Department of Transportation
Thomas Didone, Assistant Chief: Department of the County Police
Cliff Royalty. Office of the County Attorney
@
 PDF to HTML - Convert PDF files to HTML files
Economic Impact
Stat~~t
_
Bill 32·13, Motor Vehicle and Traffic - Off-Street
..,.~arking
Regulations, Plug-
in Vehicles
\
Background:
~,
This legislation would prohibit parking of a vehicle that is not
a
plug-in vehicle in
public off-street parking space that is reserved for plug-in vehicles. At the present
ti~\
e,
non-plug-in vehicles are not prohibited from parking in spaces reserved for plug-in
vehicles. By restricting certain parking spaces for plug-in vehicles, such restriction cou
encourage more use of electric plug-in vehicles across the County.
I.
The sources of information, assumptions, and methodologies used.
Department of Transportation
2. A
description of any variable that could affect the economic impact estimates.
The number of electric plug-in vehicles could affect the economic impact attributed to
an increase in the number of sales of electric plug-in vehicles by County automotive
dealerships.
3. The Bill's positive or negative effect, if any on employment, spending, saving,
investment, incomes, and property values in the County.
If the
Bill
encourages the use of electric plug-in vehic1es, the spending by County
residents for such vehicles may increase and the revenues to the County's automotive
dealerships would also increase. However, the increase in sales of such vehicles as a
result of this legislation
(as
opposed to other factors or the combination of other
factors) can not be reliably forecasted based on available data. Therefore the
economic effect cannot be measured with any specificity.
4.
If
a
Bill
is
likely to have no economic impact, why
is
that the case?
See paragraph
3.
5.
The following contributed to and concurred with
tbis
analysis: David Platt and
Rob Hagedoom, Finance;
~"-.,
J-J'---
eph . Beach, Director
Department of Finance
Page I of I
Date
I