When considering the title question, I fear some of us (assuming a measure of honesty) are thinking, “To write more citations than last year to ensure an increase in revenue.” Really? If this is our enforcement vision, clearly stated or only inferred, how does this translate into a serious examination of our parking management success in terms of organizational goals and enforcement officer performance? Will this enforcement vision generate public support?
I introduce these questions to stimulate thought. Consider that in reality a continued increase in the number of citations we write is an indication of failure. If we can agree the purpose of enforcement is to change behavior and that enforcement should have an educational nexus, we then have to face the fact that increasing noncompliance is an indication that we are failing to deter and/or failing to educate. Another possibility is that our parking programs are so woefully inadequate or so poorly marketed as to nearly invite noncompliance. This, too, is not indicative of any parking management success.
Enforcement personnel who are primarily evaluated on the volume of citations they write will find violations. However, these may not be the violations we really should be pursuing and may be motivated by a need to produce some magic number of citations each day without respect to the merit of the presenting violation. The possibility for unethical behavior on the part of enforcement officers is a concern and, stated or not, this could be considered a quota. Finally, any vision of enforcement that is evenly subtlety predicated on a number of citations as a goal effectively feeds into the very stereotypes of our industry we seek to dispel.
Whether a campus or municipality, we must consider what our vision for parking enforcement is. We have to determine if that vision is in harmony with our larger organizational goals, if the vision provides positive guidance to enforcement personnel, and if that vision could stand the test of the light of day.