OP call the Oakland parking authority, don't use the number on the ticket you received in the mail. Ask them if it's a valid ticket and if there is a picture of the violation. They always snap pictures these days.
![]()
y'all are slipping, BARF.
Got a letter in the mail (that was fast!) from City of Oaklamd that they meant 2214 Broadway (and wrote 2214 Franklin). With a picture of this sign.
The curb is not colored so that can't be a sign. The bike lane is number 3 lane so parked cars can't be blocking bike lane. The location is ~150 ft from an intersection with signals so that can't be it either.
No idea how that can be a violation of the cryptic "Obedience to Sign".
I got a parking ticket like that in the mail many years ago but from San Francisco. I simply returned it saying it was not me (I was not in SF that day and never even been in the area of the violation) and I never heard from them again.Since the city of Oakland is now a bastion of tranquility having solved the crime spree of the last 5 decades, I just received a notice of parking violation via mail that starts with "Our records show that you have failed to respond to the parking ticket listed above". The ticket is a generic violation "Obedience to Signs"
I never had a parking ticket issued in Oakland and last time I was in Oakland, I was sitting in a park right next to my car so I know nobody came by and issued a parking citation.
Secondly, the address of violation is not where I was parked.
Thirdly, the address written on the ticket is a red zone (and not where I, a paranoid maniac, would never park).
Has anybody dealt with Oakland parking mafia?
P.S. Should I even mention to them that even if the car was parked in the red zone, the right violation would be red zone violation and not a generic obedience to signs. These idiots don't even know how to write tickets.
P.P.S. There are security cameras on buildings all around the alleged parking area. If the city is so inclined they can check the cameras to see if my cage was ever there.
Got a letter in the mail (that was fast!) from City of Oaklamd that they meant 2214 Broadway (and wrote 2214 Franklin). With a picture of this sign.
The curb is not colored so that can't be a sign. The bike lane is number 3 lane so parked cars can't be blocking bike lane. The location is ~150 ft from an intersection with signals so that can't be it either.
No idea how that can be a violation of the cryptic "Obedience to Sign".
Yeah I was guessing it was BS too.
It's that way in San Francisco and many other cities.I heard that in Oakland, the partking enforcement isn't part of the police department, it's a seperate entity.
I am not sure why, but the department heads of Parking and Traffic and the Police Department hated each other.I wonder how that worked out when they called for help with a pissed off car owner?
I'd guess that police response was not fast.
If it's what was attempted in Richmond, the Parking head wanted to create their own little empire that they ruled (and probably got a huge salary increase as a result), they probably snuck to city hall and got the split passed, then kept the parking revenue for themself (instead of the police keeping it) with a percentage thrown to city hall. That would have cut a sizeable chunk out of the police budget, parking brings in $$$$$ from fines well beyond the operating costs.I am not sure why, but the department heads of Parking and Traffic and the Police Department hated each other.
In the city of SF, that happens a lot between department heads, but I have no idea why.
At least it used to.. I used to work for the Department of Electricity. Our General Manager hated Muni. But I kinda know the story there, it all started when Muni wanted to hire their own techs and no longer use us. In the end, it worked out great for both departments, but the hate between the department heads stayed until they both retired.
-Don- Lake Lahontan, NV (a ride on my 1971 BMW)
So you were parked on Broadway between 22nd and Grand?
Yeah, that's a right turn lane. I don't know that you need to paint the curb when it's a travel lane. There is a 'no stopping' sign mounted underneath the "Right Lane Must Turn Right" sign about 50' further down the curb than the end of the photo above.
The bike lanes on Broadway start around Webster and go up to hwy 24. it's just ride with the cars between the waterfront and webster. Sometimes there's a sharrow/route sign like you see in that photo.
(Though I have no idea how 'part time travel/part time parking' lanes are meant to be interpreted easily by people, but this is clearly just a travel lane.)
If it was a no stopping sign, then what is the law as to what constitutes a reasonable distance from that sign where one can park? I couldn't find anything in the Oakland parking code for this.
Dunno. In San Francisco it's 100'. Looks like California state has no rules--I see other places people get tickets for not following rules posted on the town boundary.
In this case it is less than 100', and all the parking nearby has specifically designated spaces, most with meters. I don't know how you'd know that. Also most of the intersections have red curbs, so I have no idea why this one does not. I have seen cars parked there before--maybe all of them got tickets?