Summary of Parking Reviews FY11MIAMI BEACH MEMORANDUM
City of Miami Beach, 1700 Convention Center Drive , Miami Beach, Florida 33139 , www .miamibeachfl.gov
DEPARTMENT , Inte rna l Audit
Tel: 30 5-673 -7020 , Fax : 305-673-7519
TO :
VIA:
FROM :
DATE :
Jorge M. Gonzalez , City Manager
Kathie G. Brooks, Budget and Performance Improvement Director
James J. Sutter, Internal Audit r-
February 24, 2012
SUBJECT : SUMMARY OF OBSERVATIONS FOR PARKING REVIEWS PERFORMED DURING
FY2010/2011
As part of our Annual Audit Plan , Internal Audit performs a variety of operational reviews tailored to
ensure compliance to policies and procedures, quality of customer service, identifying potential
operational efficiencies , and ensuring that revenues and City assets are properly recorded and
safeguarded with respect to the Coin Room , Attended Lots, and Meter Enforcement operations of
the Parking Department.
OVERALL OPINION
During fiscal year 2011 , a total of four (4) Coin Room , four (4) Attended Lots , and twenty four (24)
Meter Operations and Enforcement reviews were conducted at different unannounced dates and
times . Although observations documented throughout all of Internal Audit's reviews of the Coin
Room and Attended Lot operations did not provide us with reason to believe that any exception
noted significantly affects the overall financial position of the City , there were opportun ities noted to
maintain and/or improve operational efficiencies , improve safeguards and controls for City assets,
closer adherence to documented policies and procedures, and customer service.
Furthermore, the enforcement capture ratio, calculated from our Meter Operation and Enforcement
reviews, continued to be lower than industry benchmarks, as reflected on the J.L. Donoghue
Evaluation of Parking System Revenue Control, despite a minor improvement of an additional
3.62% from last year when it was averaged at 8.56%. Insufficient enforcement results in not
maximizing parking revenues collected from both, the metered space and the issued citations .
Additional details have been provided later on this memorandum, under the corresponding
operation review performed , for further details and reference.
COIN ROOM OPERATION REVIEW FINDINGS:
Coin Room operation reviews are performed quarterly in order to verify that controls, policies and
Page 1 of 7
Internal Audit Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011 February 24, 2012
procedures, and revenue accountability are consistently applied to the daily meter revenue
collections. For th is purpose , unannounced site visits were made on January 13, 2011, March 24 ,
2011, June 24 , 2011 , and on August 12, 2011 to review the Coin Room's daily operations at the
first floor of the City Hall 's new garage location. The following summarizes our findings and
observations:
a) Departures from stipulated contract and/or RFP requirements regarding the contractor's
collection vehicles continued to be experienced. For example : two of the three collection
vehicles continued to operate without air conditioning and proper equipment retrofitting despite
being reported on multiple occasions.
b) Camera blind-spots identified by Internal Audit continued to exist.
c) Discrepancies and/or irregularities continued to be observed on key reports (Ex . Master Meters
-Parkeon Reconciliation Report) used as revenue accountability control and reconciling item.
d) No variance exception report and reconciliation is completed to explain differences observed
between moneys counted in the coin room and moneys reflected on the Parkeon System
Software for multi-space meters, or from the hand held computers , for single meters . Variances
continued to be experienced without being explained , reconciled, and/or without proper
resolution to prevent them from happening in the future.
e) A second coin counter machine continued without use despite the techn ician 's recommendation
to increase its use to no less frequent than in a weekly basis in order to prevent deterioration
and maintain full operab ility.
Recommendations :
The Parking Department should address the above observations in order to improve internal
controls , as well as contractor compliance while safeguarding City assets.
Management Response(s):
a) Agreed , we have notified the contractor of this deficiency. The new contract for meter
collection , was awarded at the December 14, 2011 City Commission meeting and it requires
that the vendor provide new (2011 or newer) collection vehicles.
b) We have obtained quotes and are proceeding to add cameras to correct any blind spots.
c) There is a reconciliation report to identify and report variances. This reconciliation is done on a
daily basis and any differences are transmitted to the appropriate division for further
investigation and handling . There are several reasons why there are irregularities in the reports
i.e : optical sensor problem : the station will not restart the audit count to zero when collected ; not
transmitting collection data: the station transmits that it was collected but does not transmit the
audit report; reset by tech when performing repairs -the pay station transmits that it was
opened and the audit resets to zero (0) even though it was not collected . All these issues are
identified and corrected by the meter technicians, however, in order to cross reference the
findings with the audit report it would require additional resources for data entry and it would
also require the re-programming of the software that currently is performing the reconciliation .
The differences noted overall are below 5% which is the amount acceptable according J .L.
Donoghue Evaluation of Parking System Revenue Control dated June 28th, 2000.
d) Same as c.
e) We are currently utilizing the second back-up coin counter machine once a week .
ATTENDED LOTS OPERATION REVIEW FINDINGS:
Attended lot operation reviews are performed quarterly to evaluate operations and compliance with
documented policies and procedures established by the City 's Parking Department. These reviews
Page 2 of 7
Internal Audit Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011 February 24, 2012
are completed on two phases : Un-announced secret observations and lots walk through . Visits on
January 30 , February 17 and 18 , July 23 , and August 27 to different attended lots were conducted
during FY 2011 . The following summarizes the results from our observat ions and walk through
during our visits:
a) An option to either pay the multi-space parking meter or pay the flat special event rate continued
to be offered at some of the City 's attended lots. Providing this opt ion has proven to be
inefficient and diminishes patron satisfaction. Continuing to offer this option creates
weaknesses in operational controls and enforcement that could result in revenue
misappropriations and/or under collections of revenues.
b) Enforcement procedures were not consistently followed and/or exercised by enforcement
personnel. Expired city employee parking decals, expired city-wide parking decals, and home-
made signs suggesting that the vehicle belonged to City Employees or Contractor employees
were not properly enforce in accordance to rules and policies and procedures of the Parking
Department.
c) Lack of enforcement of the attended lots were experienced throughout the four reviews
performed during the fiscal year, partly because of a lack of communication between the
attendants , the attendant's supervisors and parking enforcement.
Recommendations:
a) The Parking Department should either attend the lots and provide the flat event rates , or do not
attend the lot and allow the patrons to pay meter rates while providing sufficient enforcement
coverage.
b) Parking Department should document and implement procedures to be consistently followed by
all enforcement personnel , in which first time warnings could be issued as a courtesy to City
employees should their parking decals be expired . Repeated offenders , however, should be
cited. Any other method or signage displayed, whether home-made by a city employee or not,
should always be cited, unless applicable parking rates have been paid and a valid ticket is
displayed on the vehicles dashboard .
c) The Parking Department should communicate this finding to the current contracted Service
Provider in order to ensure properly train ing and reminding the attendants to periodically review
the lot for violations, and immediately communicate those violations observed for enforcement.
Management Response(s):
a) The Parking Department has substantially reduced the number of parking lots that operate
under these circumstances. In fact , currently there are only three parking lots which operate in
this manner. In order to provide the highest levels of customer service approach , we honor
Miami Beach resident short term parkers (less than 3 hours) by allowing them to either pay the
parking meter in lieu of the flat rate or utilize their iPark device . This is no different than
honoring monthly customer municipal monthly parking permits or disabled permits . Please note
that these residents are paying the hourly meter rate for the period of time used. If they exceed
the time, they are cited accordingly .
b) Agreed . The Parking Department will issue permits and work on compliance within other
departments .
c) Agreed. The Service Provider has been advised to communicate violation findings to the
appropriate staff.
Page 3 of 7
Internal Audit Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011 February 24, 2012
METER OPERATION AND ENFORCEMENT REVIEW FINDINGS:
Meter Operation and Enforcement reviews are preformed throughout the year in order to confirm
that the number of citations issued and observed divided by the number of violations observed is at
least 25%, as recommended by the J.L. Donoghue Evaluation of Parking System Revenue Control
dated June 28 1
h , 2000 . This ratio is also known as the Enforcement Capture Ratio . Internal Audit
also verifies whether meters are in good working condition , ensures that there are no hazards to
customers and/or their vehicles when using the parking spaces . In addition , we verify that meters
are not vandalized or painted with graffiti. Exhibit 1, later attached reflects results from our reviews .
In addition we have summarized results from the twenty-four (24) reviews performed this fiscal year
with respect to the Meter Enforcement Capture Ratio as follows:
a) Using the results from our reviews we estimate that approximately one (1) out of every five (5)
metered spaces occupied in the City is in violation, and approximately one (1) out of eight (8) of
those in violation and eligible for citation is captured. To better illustrate this relationship for the
past fiscal year the following chart was created using the results from our reviews :
RELATIONSHIP AMONG METERED SPACES OCCUPIED WITHOUT VIOLATIONS,
METERED SPACES OCCUPIED WITH VIOLATIONS NOT CITED, AND METERED
SPACES OCCUPIED WITH VIOLATIONS CITED
r:J# OF METERED SPACES OCCUPIED
WITH NO VIOLATIONS
•# OF METERED SPACES OCCUPIED
WITH VIOLATIONS NOT CITED
D# OF METERED SPACES OCCUPIED
WITH VIOLATIONS CITED
Note: Total number o f occupied metered spaces tested was 2,3 09.
In contrast , the overall Meter Compliance Ratio (the number of occupied metered spaces with
no violations , added to the amount of occupied metered spaces with violat ions cited, divided by
total number of occupied metered spaces) resulted in approximately 83 .76%. This means that
approximately out of every one hundred (1 00) occupied metered spaces in the City,
approximately eighty-four (84) were not in violation and/or the violation was cited . This
represents a slight improvement from the previous two years when this ratio was approximately
74.31% and 79.38% respectively.
An overall Enforcement Capture Ratio of 12 .18% was observed to be less than desired industry
benchmark of 25%, as per the J .L. Donoghue Evaluation of Parking System Revenue Controls .
However this is an improvement over the 8.56% and 8.38% observed in the previous two fiscal
years. The following charts helps to illustrate the overall capture ratio resulting from our
reviews :
Page 4 of 7
Internal Audit Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011 February 24, 2012
25%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
OVERALL ENFORCEMENT CAPTURE RATIO
(#OF CITED VIOLATIONS DIVIDED BY THE TOTAL VIOLATIONS OBSERVED)
12.18%
IJ% OF VIOLATIONS OBSERVED WITH
NO CITATION
•% OF VIOLATIONS OBSERVED WITH
CITATION (CAPTURE RATIO)
OVERALL QUARTERLY ENFORCEMENT CAPTURE RATIO
(FISCAL YEAR 2011)
1st Qtr. FY2011 2nd Qtr. FY2011 3rd Qtr. FY2011 4th Qtr. FY2011
Actual observation results from our reviews are reflected on Exhibit 1 provided along with this
report for further details.
b) Other observations during our reviews included the following:
• Poorly written and/or incomplete Daily Activity Reports continued to be prepared by the
enforcement officers . In one case, the officer did not submit the daily activity report at
the end of the shift alleging he had lost it.
• Errors regarding vehicle and zones of enforcement assignments to the officers on the
Enforcement Division Daily Schedule, prepared by the shift supervisors, continued to be
experienced .
• Contradicting information with respect to actual observations and officer 's assignment
description and/or locations was entered on the Enforcement Division Daily Activity
reports .
• Commercial and/or passenger loading zones were not properly enforced.
Page 5 of 7
Internal Audit Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011 February 24, 2012
Recommendations:
a) The Parking Department should continue its effort to improve the enforcement capture of
illegally parked vehicles in the City. Additional supervision on the field should be implemented
in order to improve adherence to enforcement policies and procedures that promote parking
compliance, enhance public safety, and improve traffic conditions in the City. Furthermore
better planning and enforcement route scheduling should help to increase enforcement
coverage and efficiencies by eliminating too many officers having lunch and breaks at the same
time and preventing concurrent enforcement of overlapping zones by enforcement personnel.
b) Parking Enforcement Division should review and compare all daily schedules, include the
officer's Daily Activity report, the Officer/Unit Status Inquiry Listing, and the Detail Call for
Service Report, to verify their reliability , legibility, and ensure their agreement. Any exception
should be investigated. Once the review is complete, then the reports should be signed as
reviewed by the shift supervisor.
In addition, installation of Vehicle Global Locator devices should be considered which would add
to the verifiability of the Officer's daily activity reports, but also increase efficiencies and reduce
response time to parking complains by assigning the closest officer to the complain location.
Furthermore, corresponding training should be provided to enforcement personnel and
enforcement supervisors in order to emphasize the importance, and requirement of legible,
reliable, detailed, and complete reports for the success and accountability of the overall
operation.
Moreover, policies and procedures regarding the enforcement of Commercial and/or Passenger
Loading Zones should be updated and distributed to all enforcement officers to be consistently
followed by all enforcement personnel.
Management Response(s):
a) The Parking Department concurs and continues its efforts to improve the enforcement capture
ratio through enhanced staffing and supervision. Of note, additional staffing through part-time
employees has significantly increase flexibility in scheduling and deployment of resources. The
Parking Department is currently pursuing this same strategy at the supervisory level as well. In
addition, it should be noted that while the capture ratio is an important metric, the ultimate goal
(and metric) is the compliance ratio which is reported later in this document at an overall
average of 83%.
b) Agreed. Parking Enforcement staff productivity and accountability is monitored through various
means, including GPS (Global Positioning System); daily activity reports ; productivity logs that
account for the number, time/date, and location of citations issued during an officer's tour of
duty; taped radio and telephone communication lines; and supervisor field observations . Lastly,
legible and accurate reporting may be included in the goals and expectations section of an
employee 's performance evaluation. This would be an effective manner by which to attain
compliance in these areas .
(Summary completed by Fidel Miranda, Auditor)
CC : Jorge Gomez, Assistant City Manager
Saul Francis , parking Department Director
Chuck Adams, Assistant Parking Director
F :\OBPI\$AUD\INTERNAL AUDIT FILES\DOC10-11\REPORTS-FINAL\S UMMARY OF PARKING REVIEWS FY2011 .docx
Page 6 of 7
Internal Aud it Memorandum
Summary of Parking Reviews Performed FY 2010/2011
OBPJ -INTERNAL. AUDrT
METER OPERATION AND ENFORCEMENT SUMIIIARY
From Oct. 2010 to Sept.. 2011
TOTAL -SIHGLE METERS:
TOTAL -MASTER METERS:
815
1894
OVERALL TOTALS: 2309 2309
OVERALL AVERAGES: 72 72
182
2115
4 27
13
7
45
52
0
EXHIBIT1
Q
18
Page 7 of 7
28.34'10 4 .32'10
1 5 .64~ 18.98ftf.
18.4QCM. 12.18%
18.40% 12. 18'M.
74.80~
87.0 1'10
83.7ft%
8 3 .76'!6
February 24 , 2012