Slashdot Mirror


San Francisco Bans Parking Spot Auctioning App

A couple months ago, we discussed a new phone app being used in San Francisco to auction off parking spaces to the highest bidder. The city has now ordered the app makers to cease and desist, and threatened motorists with a $300 fine for each transaction. City Attorney Dennis Herrera said, Technology has given rise to many laudable innovations in how we live and work -- and Monkey Parking is not one of them. It's illegal, it puts drivers on the hook for $300 fines, and it creates a predatory private market for public parking spaces that San Franciscans will not tolerate. Worst of all, it encourages drivers to use their mobile devices unsafely — to engage in online bidding wars while driving. People are free to rent out their own private driveways and garage spaces should they choose to do so. But we will not abide businesses that hold hostage on-street public parking spots for their own private profit.

22 of 404 comments (clear)

  1. Communism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

    Banning this is communism!
    This is the free market at work.

    1. Re:Communism by tsqr · · Score: 4, Informative

      if they're privately owned parking spots then this should be allowed

      From TFS: "People are free to rent out their own private driveways and garage spaces should they choose to do so."

    2. Re:Communism by dunkindave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Banning this is communism! This is the free market at work.

      Standard Oil crushing their competition by offering gas at below cost was "free market". Microsoft refusing to license Windows to a vendor unless they not offer other operating systems was "free market". Stock traders creating derivatives that collapsed the housing market was "free market". Slave traders were "free market". The term "free market" can be interpreted as meaning allowing a person to do any business deal without interference from the government, whether morally right or not. The purpose of the government "interference" is to protect the common good, such as by stopping the sale of humans (slave), prevent competition through unnatural monopolies, and the sale of access to public areas by private parties.

      What would you think if a group occupied the entire Waikiki beach area in Hawaii with large towels then told people they would auction off their spaces so others could use the beach? It isn't their beach, it is everyone's, and all they are doing is squatting and blocking other's access to the public land. Is this "free market", and even if it is, is it in the common good to allow it to continue?

      Some argue that this app is merely a way for people to give information about an available space (at a price) that aperson is about to leave, but as others have pointed out, it delays the person's departure thereby reducing effective parking availability. It also causes people to use phones while driving which in San Francisco is a crime, so it promotes a criminal act. It also is ripe for abuse by people deliberately seeking out parking spaces then selling them, which is a far cry from what the app developers claim the app was made for. To me, this all spells that this app goes against the common good and is therefore bad. It is also illegal based on current laws according to the City Attorney.

    3. Re:Communism by vux984 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why do the neighbors take exception to it, though?

      Because some people don't want their normally quiet residential neighborhood looking like a cross between a night market and an impound lot all summer.

      Its hardly unusual for there to be bylaws restricting the amount and type of commerce you conduct from your home, especially if it leads to unwanted traffic, noise, or is unsightly.

      This situation is all of those.

    4. Re:Communism by Darinbob · · Score: 4, Funny

      Parking lots are the means of reproduction, in some cities.

    5. Re:Communism by Copid · · Score: 3, Insightful
      A few years ago, SF installed smart meters with sensors to do exactly this. Rates were set dynamically with the goal of keeping at least one space open on every block of public parking. It worked really well. There were piles of data generated during the trial run. It appears to have reduced cruising for spaces substantially (which was one of the key goals). They had a map of the most and least expensive places to park so people could adjust their plans accordingly. They're not using the sensors anymore (something about maintenance cost), but prices do change by the hour. If they just kept it up (and expanded it to cover all public parking), this problem would go away completely and the world would be a better place.

      Anyway:

      Many people at the cities ages or industrial areas are low income workers, so a market rate parking can have a real financial dent. The public transportation response is a non starter until that are has good public transportation.

      There's a *ton* of options for public transportation in SF. People who drive in and try to park in the most congested areas are doing so by choice.

      I know a lot of low income worker who basically lost 2 hours worth of wages. A 1/4 of the day just to park. What happened is they ended up parking farther away, in a more sketchier area.

      That's a very strange result. On the one hand, they were easily getting parking before the meter rates were raised. Now, the meter rates are greater than or equal to 1/4 of a day's wages (otherwise they'd just park at the meter and pay the price). Why are the rates so high if the spaces weren't contested to begin with? Are the spaces now sitting empty?

      How do you determine market rate for after work hours parking?

      Very easily. You have an algorithm that steadily raises prices as the parking spaces fill up and lower them as spaces remain vacant with the goal of keeping N spaces empty per block of spaces. It works brilliantly (and, BTW, results in some parking meters charging only pennies per day if the place is not busy).

      Free parking means more people will shop and enjoy the entertainment, so putting a charge cost business money.

      That implies that free parking magically means more parking. If the spaces are full, the same number of people are there. They may be out a few extra bucks for parking, but making the parking free doesn't suddenly allow you to put 2 gallons of water into a 1 gallon bucket.

      --
      An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  2. Gotta agree with it being illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's based on holding public space hostage.

    1. Re:Gotta agree with it being illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Scalping is legal practically anywhere these days (except typically on the premises for the event). Wrigley field has legalized scalping. Last time I was in Atlanta, they had a line drawn a few hundred yards from the stadium at which point it was legal to scalp tickets. Have you heard of Stubhub? The secondary market is huge. Regardless, it's nothing like that. Event tickets are not public property.

    2. Re:Gotta agree with it being illegal by Obfuscant · · Score: 4, Interesting

      But that would mean you -- not the winner of the auction -- were breaking the law. And it would be hard to prove. You fed the meter properly, you're having lunch. Big deal. In order to prove a violation you'd have to prove intent, which is seldom easy.

      You're kidding, right? As soon as you use the app you've proven intent. You can't go online and say "I'll sell this space to the highest bidder" and then claim you didn't intend to sell the space to the highest bidder. That's just nuts.

      Having said that, I grant that it could be used in ways that are likely illegal... like holding the spot for the person who won the auction.

      That's the intent of the service. How long do you think such a service would last if all it did was sell "information" about where someone was leaving a parking spot? The buyer would show up and someone who didn't pay would have already taken it. If it is truly a busy area, then there are going to be people who are watching everyone who approaches any parked car like a hawk, and unless your buyer was also doing that (which defeats the reason to buy the information) he's not going to get an honestly vacated space.

      Why would anyone in their right mind bid on "information" that everyone in within fifty feet of the seller can see for himself, and would be there to take advantage of long before any auction could take place, much less the winner driving to the location to accept his prize? The information is worthless within 30 seconds of it appearing; it's only the physical space that makes it valuable.

    3. Re:Gotta agree with it being illegal by ultranova · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Having said that, I grant that it could be used in ways that are likely illegal... like holding the spot for the person who won the auction. Then you might be said to be actually holding it hostage. But that would mean you -- not the winner of the auction -- were breaking the law. And it would be hard to prove.

      The only way information received from this application could possibly be useful was precisely if the auctioner held the spot for the winner. Because otherwise it would already be long taken by the time they got around, even if they were just a few city blocks away. Alternatively, San Francisco has an abundance of parking spaces, so what would be the point of this app?

      Does it ever make you uncomfortabe how posting this kind of reflexive, unthinking, ideology-based bullshit makes you exactly like the Stalinists of old, just with a different set of keyword triggers? Do you ignore the similarities because clearly, their ideology was wrong and yours is right? Or do you simply lack the self-awareness to notice?

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

  3. Re:They hate our freedom by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It occurs to me that knowing where a parking space is available would reduce time spent driving around, itself reducing pollution, excess expenditure on additional fuel, the clogging of streets, and other issues associated with tons of traffic driving in circles throughout the city.

    These people are providing the city the great and valuable service of a functional smart parking grid operating when parking congestion is high.

  4. Good luck proving this in a court of law... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I can see this type of service continuing on.

    1: Parking spaces are in demand.
    2: People are willing to pay cash for one.
    3: Other people want money.

    All that needs to happen is that the server gets moved offshore, and the app be made as a Web app so it survives being pulled from Apple's store.

    I remember this exact same thing happening at a place I worked at when in college. They were such sticklers about being on time for shift that a second late on the phones meant a six month denial of promotions, and being late for any reason three times is an automatic termination. So, people from the neighborhood would fill this place's parking lot up about an hour before shift changed and demand cash... and the employees of this firm would pony up to a C-note in order to get a place, drive a car about a half mile from the office and park in a seedy neighborhood, or be late and stuck on the phones for another half-year with a freeze on raises.

    I applaud SF banning this app, but in reality, it won't help, and this is just the start of it. I won't be surprised to see a black market for parking spaces, with people sitting for hours to "sell" theirs, happening soon. Especially home games in university towns or other places where people go for an event.

  5. Re:They hate our freedom by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Insightful

    But not the basic fact of people exchanging money for information.

    It falls back to 'holding a public space hostage' the moment the seller stays in his spot any longer than he would have without the application in order to get said money/allow the buyer the spot. I believe that the application amounts to being worthless if the seller doesn't hold the space for the buyer, because in my experience somebody will pull into the spot less than a minute later without any intervention.

    This leads to less efficient use of space due to lingering, which is what the city wants to avoid.

    --
    I don't read AC A human right
  6. Re:They hate our freedom by MarkvW · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "People have the freedom to do as they want."

    Your opinion will change when you grow up.

  7. Re:So much for that idea... by timrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It still has some use, but they're just not doing it right. The City admitted that people can rent out their driveways or private garages as parking spaces, so I could easily see a revision of this app that works sort of like Uber but for parking spaces.

    People who have parking spaces to spare (apartment blocks, businesses, private homeowners) sell their driveways or parking lots as parking spaces. The people buying pay the property owner a given amount, and a percentage of that comes back to the company as a "finder's fee". You could even have businesses buy parking spaces in people's driveways nearby that are only valid for that business, ie;

    Business A has a parking lot that isn't big enough to meet customer capacity at peak hours. They're in a position that would make it very difficult to expand their parking ,but there are nearby homes that have large, unused driveways. Business A can rent some of those driveways and mark them as specifically for use for their customers, so that their customers now have a place to park during peak hours.

    I bet you could still make some pretty good money with it, since I'm sure apartment owners would love to get money for letting people use spaces that would otherwise go unused. The only real problem would be enforcement, but I'm sure there's some way around that.

  8. Enforceable ? by markus_baertschi · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The company is based in Italy and does not target San Francisco specifically. I don't think San Francisco has standing to sue them.

    1. Re:Enforceable ? by Wycliffe · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Is the money collected in person? Or does the spot holder wait for a specific license plate?
      Either way, a sting operation should be easy enough to set up. The spots are physically
      in SF so I don't think they can ban the app but they can certainly fine people for using this app
      or any other method to require money in order vacate a spot.

  9. Re:They hate our freedom by PvtVoid · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Specific practices like driver using phone while driving, or curb parking time limits can certainly be regulated. But not the basic fact of people exchanging money for information. Dislike it all you want, but people have freedom to do as they want.

    It is illegal to exchange money for all kinds of information. Credit card and Social Security numbers, for example. Insider trading, for another. It continually amazes me the degree to which crackpot libertarian ideology is so consistently blind to extremely common legal practice. Do you people spend all of your time in the basement?

    Furthermore, a law banning the parking app would be trivial to enforce. Just have police answer the ads, find the douchebag who is blocking the spot in order to charge for it, tow their car, and give them a nice big ticket. Can't happen soon enough.

  10. Re:They hate our freedom by whoever57 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    These people are providing the city the great and valuable service of a functional smart parking grid operating when parking congestion is high.

    There seems to be an unwritten premise behind your claim that the space would be unused if it were not for this app. In fact, the reverse is true -- likely the driver "selling" the space will remain in place longer than necesssary so that he/she can sell the parking space. Without the ability to sell a space, it will be vacated more quickly and then immediately filled by another driver who happens to be driving by (because there is a shortage of parking).

    --
    The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
  11. Re:They hate our freedom by pr0fessor · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I pay taxes that are used to build and maintain roads including public parking, why on earth would I allow a third party to make money off public parking if it's not re-invested into the road system (hopefully to address problems with parking).

  12. Re:Anyone who knows street parking in San Francisc by DerekLyons · · Score: 3, Funny

    It's city's fault for not designing streets for both residents and expected number of visitors.

    Yes - damn the city planners of the 1870's for not anticipating the conditions of 2014.

  13. Re:They hate our freedom by stephanruby · · Score: 3, Interesting

    No, the city already has parking motion detectors on their parking meters that can detect when a street parking space is vacated and the city also makes available a free real-time api that third party developers can use for republishing that information (for free, or even for a profit if those third party desire). There are already several apps on the market that do this (that the city has no problem with)

    What this particular app encouraged was to keep parking spaces occupied, until a particular ransom was paid. This meant that cars with disabled placards (which are not required to pay anything, and not required to move by a certain time) would have the incentive to hold a parking space indefinitely until they got paid. And this also meant that some business storefront owners could hold spaces by placing junk/furniture/pots of flowers on a parking space, so that no other car could pull into it unless they got paid off as well.

    Unfortunately, holding parking spaces illegally is already a common practice in San Francisco (even before that mobile application came on the market). Regularly, business owners are caught painting the curb of their sidewalks in front of their store with green, yellow, or red, without having the proper city permits to do so (those illegal markings can be distinguished because they're not stamped with the usual SFPD and the red markings around storefronts/private driveways usually extend far more than they're supposed to).